/c 


3frnm  \\\t  IGibrarQ  nf 

Ipqueatii^Ji  bg  Ijtm  tn 

\\\i  ICtbrarg  of 

Prtnretnn  ®l|pnIo9tral  S^mtnar^ 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2011  with  funding  from 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


http://www.archive.org/details/presentdaytheoloOOstea 


Present  Day  Theology 


A  POPULAR  DISCUSSION  OF  LEADING  DOCTRINES 
OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  FAITH 


LEWIS   FRENCH   STEARNS 

LATE    PROFESSOR    OF  CHRISTIAN   THEOLOGY   IN    BANGOR   THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARY 


WITH    A    BIOGRAPHICAL    SKETCH    BY 

GEORGE  L.  PRENTISS 

PROFESSOR   IN    UNION    THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARY 


NEW  YORK 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS 

1893 


Copyright,  1893,  by 
CHARLES    SCRI13NER'S    SONS 


TROW  DIRECTOBY 

PRINTING  AND  BOOKBINDING  COMPANY 

NEW  YORK 


OOXTEETS 


Biographical  Sketch, v 

I.  The  Natural  Revelation  oi<'  God,  .        .        .1 

II.  The  Redemptive  Revelation,      ....  18 

III.  The  Evidences  of  Christianity,     ....  36 

IV.  The  Meaning  op  the  Miracles,  ....  58 
V.  The  Holy  Scriptures, 75 

VI.  Inspiration, 93 

VII.  The  Kingdom  of  God 110 

VIII.  Jesus  the  Christ, 129 

IX.  Christological  Problems,         .        .        .        .        .  152 

X.  Relation  of  Christ  to  God  and  the  Creation,  170 

XI.  The  Trinity, 189 

XII.  The  Christian  Conception  of  God,     .        .        .  209 

XIII.  The  Plan  of  God, 228 

XIV.  Creation, 248 

XV.  The  Providence  of  God, 264 

XVI.  Man, 282 

XVII.  The  Nature  and  Guilt  of  Sin,       ....  301 

XVIII.  Sin  and  Man's  Race  Relations,   ....  321 

XIX.  Man's  Condition  as  a  Sinner,         ....  343 

XX.  The  Redemptive  Work  of  Christ,      .        .        .  361 


IV  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

XXI.     The  Eedemptive  Wokk  of  Christ,  ....  381 

XXII.     The  Redemptive  Wokk  of  Ciiiust,       .         .        .  402 

XXIII.  Electiox  and  Pkedestination,         ....  424 

XXIV.  Justification  by  Faith, 440 

XXV.     The  New  Life, 457 

XXVI.     The  Othek  Life, 476 

XXVIL     The  Day  of  the  Loud, 502 

The  Present  Direction  of  Theological  Thought  in  the 

Congregational  Churches  of  the  United  Statcs,       .  531 

Index  of  Subjects, 547 

Index  op  Scrifture  Passages, 564 


BIOGEAPHICAL  SKETCH 


Lewis  Fkench  Stearns  was  born  at  Newburyport, 
Mass.,  on  March  10,  1847.  His  fatlier  was  the  Hev. 
Jonathan  French  Stearns,  then  pastor  erf  the  Federal 
Street  Presbyterian  Church  in  that  ancient  town.  The 
maiden  name  of  his  mother  was  Anna  S.  Prentiss.  He 
was  the  second  of  three  chiklren.  The  eldest,  Seargent 
Prentiss  Stearns,  Consul-General  at  Montreal  under 
President  Arthur,  is  now  living  in  that  city,  and  his  sis- 
ter Annie  is  the  wife  of  Dr.  Austin  Scott,  President  of 
Rutgers  College,  New  Brunswick,  N.  J.  He  had  good 
reason  to  rejoice  in  his  parentage.  It  made  him  heir, 
along  several  lines,  to  the  oldest  and  best  religious  life 
of  New  England.  On  his  father's  side  it  allied  him  with 
a  ministerial  family  noted  through  successive  genera- 
tions for  admirable  personal  qualities,  piety,  and  wide 
influence.  Dr.  O.  W.  Holmes,  in  his  poem  "  The  School- 
Boy,"  described  it  as 

a  saintly  race  that  never  could, 

From  youth  to  age,  be  anything  but  good. 

On  his  mother's  side  he  inherited  some  of  the  pleas- 
antest,  as  well  as  worthiest,  memories  of  Cape  Cod  and 
the  Old  Colony,  and  of  Maine,  in  the  eighteenth  and  first 
third  of  the  nineteenth  century.  All  the  roots  of  his 
being  ran  back  into  the  rich  Puritan  and  Pilgrim  soil  of 
the  seventeenth  century. 


VI  BIOGRAPHICAL   SKETCH 

In  the  autumn  of  1849  his  father  accepted  a  call  to 
the  First  Presbyterian  Church  of  Newark,  N.  J.  Here 
Lewis  sjDent  his  boyhood,  and  this  was  the  home  of  his 
student  years.  Newark  at  that  time  was  a  leading  cen- 
tre, in  New  Jersey,  of  Presbyteriauism,  as  also  of  social 
culture,  professional  talents,  public  spirit,  and  success- 
ful manufacturing  industries.  Its  history  was  full  of 
lionored  names.  The  First  Church  especially  abounded, 
both  then  and  through  all  its  previous  annals,  in  men 
prominent  alike  in  Church  and  State.  It  was  a  good  en- 
vironment for  the  growth  of  solid  virtues.  And  Lewis 
showed,  while  still  a  child,  a  keen  susceptibility  to  the 
best  influences  about  him.  He  was  marked,  even  as  a 
little  boy,  by  striking  individual  traits.  The  observing 
eye  of  his  aunt,  the  author  of  "  Stepping  Heavenward," 
was  early  attracted  to  him,  and  he  soon  won  her  spe- 
cial affection — an  affection  that  rijDened  into  a  life-long 
friendship.  Her  letters  contain  fi-equent  allusions  to 
him.  Here  is  a  passage  from  one  to  his  mother,  dated 
Newark,  August  14,  1851.  Lewis  was  then  four  and  a 
half  years  old,  and  his  aunt  occupied  the  parsonage, 
while  his  parents  were  absent  on  a  journey  : 

All  is  going  on  well  at  your  house.  Luly  is  perfectly  well  and 
the  very  best  of  boys,  and  you  would  smile  to  see  him  in  his  papa's 
place  at  the  breakfast-table,  while  I  occupy  yours,  each  of  us  as 
grave  as  a  judge.  He  comes  up  every  morning  and  waits  on  me 
down  to  breakfast,  looking  as  neat  as  a  pink. 

A  few  weeks  later,  in  another  letter,  she  pictures  him 
as  bursting  with  joyous  excitement  and  racing  "  like 
mad,"  with  a  little  cousin,  up  and  down  a  Sound 
steamer.  His  brother  thus  depicts  some  of  his  traits 
as  a  boy  and  a  student : 

His  first  real  preparation  for  college  began  at  the  Newark 
Academy,  then,  as  now,  the  leading  school  in  Newark.     Here  he 


BIOGRAPHICAL   SKETCH  Vll 

worked  hard  and  showed  that  aptitude  for  acquirement  and  pains- 
taking thoroughness  in  his  studies  which  afterward  so  distin- 
guished him.  He  mastered  everything  as  he  went  along,  and  had 
a  relish  for  study  for  study's  sake.  Besides  the  regular  curricu- 
lum, which  consisted  of  the  ordinary  English  branches  and  the 
rudiments  of  Latin  and  Greek,  he  took  up  of  his  own  volition  and 
outside  of  school  the  study  of  German  and  French,  and  of  experi- 
mental chemistry.  For  the  latter  he  fitted  up  a  laboratory  in  the 
attic  of  the  old  parsonage  where  we  then  lived,  and  carried  on 
such  experiments  and  investigations  as  the  limited  means  at  his 
disposal  would  permit.  He  constructed  a  rough  camera  out  of  a 
cigar-box  and  the  lens  of  a  magic  lantern,  and  astonished  us  by 
taking  some  very  fair  photographs  of  neighboring  objects.  It 
was  at  this  time,  and  I  mention  it  as  an  interesting  development 
of  his  many-sided  character,  that  he  meditated  the  invention  of  a 
new  language,  and  with  infinite  care  and  patience  proceeded  to 
establish  for  it  an  alphabet  and  grammar.  Of  course  this  task 
was,  after  a  while,  and  before  it  had  taken  complete  foi'm,  aban- 
doned, but  it  showed  the  bent  of  his  mind  and  his  confidence  in 
his  inventive  faculty.  About  this  time,  too,  he  edited  a  weekly 
paper,  which  was  neatly  written  out  in  manuscript,  and  read  be- 
fore the  school.  A  little  later  on  he  printed  copies  of  them  on 
a  little  hand-press  which  had  been  given  to  him,  and  distributed 
them  among  his  mates. 

He  was  very  fond  of  music  and  no  mean  musician,  although 
mainly  self-taught,  playing  fairly  well  on  both  the  piano  and  the 
flute,  and  when  his  eyes  first  began  to  trouble  him  and  interfere 
with  his  work,  whiling  away  many  a  weary  hour  with  one  or  the 
other. 

He  had  a  peculiar  aflFection  for  cats,  and  they  seemed  drawn  to 
him,  and  as  far  back  as  I  can  remember  he  had  one  or  more  of 
these  pets  attached  to  him,  and  his  whimsical  humor  showed  it- 
self in  the  odd  names  he  gave  to  them. 

He  was  the  soul  of  the  domestic  circle,  interesting  in  conversa- 
tion, quick  at  repartee,  full  of  wit,  with  a  keen  sense  of  the  ridic- 
ulous and  a  rare  art  of  putting  things,  and  the  idol  of  the  chil- 
dren.    Wherever  he  was,  there  was  sure  to  be  fun  and  frolic. 

The  home  at  the  old  Newark  parsonage  was  one  of 
ahnost  ideal  comfort  and  sweetness.     All  gracious  influ- 


Vlll  BIOGRAPHICAL   SKETCH 

ences  conspired  to  bless  it.  Strength  and  beauty  were 
in  it.  The  father  Avas  an  eminently  wise  as  Avell  as  good 
man  ;  cultured,  social,  public-spirited,  of  commanding 
influence,  and  a  model  of  pastoral  fidelity.  The  mother, 
a  woman  of  rare  attractions  and  force  of  character,  shed 
brightness  upon  all  about  her.  An  aged  and  saintly 
grandmother,  his  brother  and  sister,  to  all  of  whom 
Lewis  was  deeply  attached,  completed  this  Christian 
home.  Its  hospitable  doors  were  constantly  opening 
also  to  Avelcome  kindred  and  friends  from  New  York  and 
New  England,  wdiose  visits  and  conversation  formed  no 
small  element  in  the  education  of  LeAvis  Stearns.  His 
uncle,  President  Stearns,  of  Amherst  College,  was  one  of 
these  visitors  ;  and  another,  coming  much  oftener,  and 
laden  always  with  the  good  cheer  of  learned,  as  also  of 
unlearned  and  merry  talk,  Avas  Henry  Boynton  Smith,  of 
NeAv  York,  Professor  in  Union  Theological  Seminary. 
Among  the  early  and  most  intimate  friends  of  LcAvis 
was  Kichard  Wayne  Parker,  Esq.,  of  NcAvark,  who  gives 
the  folloAving  recollections  of  him  : 

We  were  brouglit  up  together  in  Newark.  For  several  years  he 
was  my  classmate  at  the  Academy.  In  1862  he  went  to  Andover 
to  study  at  Phillips  Academy,  and  I  followed  him  the  next  year. 
We  entered  Princeton  together  and  were  close  companions  during 
all  the  college  coiu-se,  graduating  in  1867.  In  the  classics  he  was 
the  undisputed  first  of  his  class.  For  a  year  or  more  we  were  at 
the  Columbia  Law  School.  In  1871  I  joined  him  in  Europe,  and 
we  travelled  three  months  together — together  night  and  day.  If 
anybody  knew  him  well,  I  did.  Even  as  a  boy  he  thought,  stud- 
ied, and  acted  for  himself ;  and  he  seemed  to  feel  and  realize  the 
duties,  ambitions,  problems,  and  mysteries  of  life  with  an  inten- 
sity that  marked  all  he  said  or  did.  He  had  a  natural  earnestness 
of  character,  united  to  an  almost  feminine  sensibility  that  ren- 
dered the  simplest  situation  grave  to  him,  in  its  surroundings  and 
possibilities.  I  never  knew  anyone  who  seemed  to  me  to  hate 
evil  as  he  did.     I  have  re-read  my  diary  of  1871,  and  noted  the 


BIOGRAPHICAL   SKETCH  IX 

record  in  it  of  his  liorror  of  Carlsbad  gambling,  of  European 
morals,  and  of  all  those  foreign  customs  and  ways  abroad  that 
are  so  contrary  to  our  American  ideas  of  true  living.  I  have  al- 
ways regretted  that  he  gave  up  the  bar.  Great  as  he  was  in  the- 
ology, I  believe  his  peculiar  gifts  of  mind  and  character  qualified 
him  to  be  greater  still  in  the  law.  The  first  and  foremost  thing 
about  him  was  his  love  of  truth.  He  made  early  and  strong 
friendshiiDS  ;  nor  was  one  of  them  ever  broken. 

Early  in  1869  liis  mother  died,  and  not  long  after  lie 
decided  to  devote  liimself  to  the  ministry  of  the  Gospel. 
His  theological  studies  were  pursued  at  Princeton  Sem- 
inary, 1869-70  ;  at  the  Universities  of  Berlin  and  Leip- 
zig, 1870-71 ;  and  at  Union  Seminary,  in  the  city  of 
New  York,  1871-72.  In  October,  1873,  he  was  or- 
dained and  installed  over  the  Presbyterian  church  at 
Norwood,  N.  J.  During  his  short  ministry  in  this  place 
he  greatly  endeared  himself  to  the  people.  His  imme- 
diate successor  testifies  to  the  strong  impression  which 
his  manly  and  Christian  qualities — especially  his  pasto- 
ral kindness,  sympathy,  and  gentle  ways — left  upon  the 
little  parish.  Many  years  later  I  myself  witnessed  a 
touching  illustration  of  the  enduring  power  and  tender- 
ness of  this  impression.  In  1876  he  accepted  a  call  to 
the  Professorship  of  History  and  Belles-lettres,  in  Al- 
bion CoUege,  at  Albion,  Mich.  Resigning  in  1879,  on 
account  of  a  serious  affection  of  the  eyes,  he  returned  to 
his  father's  house,  where  he  spent  the  next  year  in 
varied  literary  Avork,  trying  his  hand  at  a  novel  for  one 
thing,  and  in  learning  the  expert  use  of  a  typewriter.* 
I  was  brought  into  very  close  intimacy  with  him  at  this 

*  The  story  (writes  a  friend)  bore  the  title  of  "  Camp  Out,"  and  was 
based  upon  his  own  experiences  in  the  Adirondacks.  It  was  charmingly 
written  and  would,  no  doubt,  have  attracted  many  readers  by  its  com- 
bination of  fancy  and  imagination,  by  its  delicate  humor,  and  by  its 
bright  pictures  of  nature.  The  MS.  had  just  been  sent  to  the  pub- 
lisher when  the  call  to  Bangor  came. 


X  BIOGRAPHICAL   SKETCH 

time  and  observed  Avitli  delight  tlie  growing  breadth, 
power,  and  maturity  of  his  culture,  both  literary  and 
theological.  Finding  me  one  day  busied  with  "  The 
Life  and  Letters  "  of  his  aunt,  and  worried  at  the  pros- 
pect of  reading  the  tangled  "  joroofs  "  of  my  undecipher- 
able MS.,  he  begged  that  I  would  let  him  type-write  it 
for  me,  meeting  my  refusal  with  the  assurance  that  it 
would  be  a  real  labor  of  love.  And  so  the  whole  MS., 
neatly  type- written  by  him,  passed  into  the  hands  of 
the  printer. 

About  this  time  he  was  called  to  the  chair  of  system- 
atic divinity  in  the  Theological  Seminary  at  Bangor,  Me. 
In  a  letter  dated  August  22,  1880,  and  addressed  to  the 
Rev.  S.  H.  Hayes,  a  trustee  of  the  seminary,  I  thus  ex- 
pressed my  opinion  of  him  : 

And  now  as  to  the  position  in  Bangor.  In  my  judgment  he  is 
adnnrably  fitted  for  a  chair  of  theology,  mentally,  morally,  and 
spiritually.  I  know  of  no  man  of  his  age  whom  I  regard  as  his 
superior  in  such  qualifications.  He  comes  of  one  of  the  oldest 
and  best  New  England  stocks,  is  an  accomplished  scholar,  a 
thoughtful,  earnest  Christian,  has  had  experience  as  a  pastor  and 
academic  teacher,  is  at  once  liberal  and  conservative  in  his  temper, 
is  full  of  enthusiasm  for  truth,  understanding  thoroughly  the 
problems  of  modern  thought  and  the  great  questions  of  the  day, 
and  would  impress  himself  strongly,  I  should  expect,  ujDon  young 
men  under  his  care.  I  think  he  rather  prefers  Congregationalism 
to  Presbyterianism,  a  touch  of  heredity,  perhaps.  As  a  son  of 
Maine,  I  feel  a  hearty  interest  in  Bangor,  and  should  certainly 
think  the  seminary  fortunate,  and  the  faculty  also,  if  he  should  be 
called  to  its  chair  of  theology. 

He  accepted  the  call  after  painful  hesitation  and  only 
at  my  urgent  persuasion  and  that  of  his  father,  23rotest- 
ing  that  he  w'as  not  qualified  for  the  chair  of  theology, 
either  mentally  or  spiritually.  His  modesty  was  not  less 
striking  than  his  ability.     From  the  first,  however,  he 


BIOGRAPHICAL   SKETCH  XI 

approved  himself  to  be  the  right  man  in  the  right  place, 
uncommonly  gifted  alike  as  a  teacher  and  thinker.  His 
inaugural  adch-ess, "  delivered  in  June,  1881,  at  the  close 
of  the  seminary  year,  attracted  wide  attention  and 
showed  plainly  that  a  new  theologian  of  the  type  of 
Henry  Boynton  Smith  was  coming  upon  the  stage.  A 
single  extract  will  indicate  the  quality  and  scope  of  this 
address : 

The  great  body  of  Christians  in  this  country  have  never  aban- 
doned the  belief  that  Jesus  Christ  is  in  the  highest  sense  God. 
In  the  denominations  which  are  the  rightful  heirs  of  the  primi- 
tive churches  of  the  land  there  is  no  difference  of  opinion  upon 
this  subject. 

But,  while  we  hold  thus  firmly  to  Christ's  divinity,  our  age  has 
rejoiced  to  learn  with  new  power  the  meaning  of  his  humanity. 
The  devotion  with  which  the  gospel  history  has  been  studied,  the 
great  number  and  popularity  of  the  lives  of  Christ  which  have 
appeared  during  the  last  three  or  four  decades  show  the  direction 
of  current  thought.  It  is  in  the  man  Christ  Jesus  that  this  gen- 
eration has  been  taught  to  discover  the  God  who  was  manifest  in 
the  flesh.  It  is  when  we  see  the  marks  of  his  human  suffering 
and  feel  in  our  inmost  hearts  his  brotherhood  with  us  that  we  cry, 
as  Thomas  did,   "  My  Lord  and  my  God  !  " 

The  system  of  Christian  doctrine  must  find  its  centre  in  Christ. 
The  old  reformed  theology,  the  theology  of  Calvin  and  of  the 
Westminster  and  Savoy  Confessions,  the  theology  of  our  Ameri- 
can Calvinistic  churches  centred  in  the  decrees  of  God.  It  was  a 
high  thought  to  begin  thus  back  in  the  eternal  purpose  of  the 
Almighty,  and  from  that  transcendent  stand-point  to  develop  the 
whole  system  of  Christian  faith.  The  result  was  a  logical,  powerful, 
most  coherent  whole.  In  all  the  modifications  of  Calvinism,  from 
Edwards  to  Emmons,  that  centre  was  maintained';  but  it  is  so  no 
longer.  Long  ago  Christian  thought,  quietly  and  scarcely  aware 
of  the  change  it  was  undergoing — a  revolution  almost  as  great  as 
that  through  which  science  passed  in  its  transition  from  the  Ptol- 
emaic to  the  Copernican  system — detached  itself  from  the  old 
centre  and  began  to  swing  freely  around  the  new.  The  former 
system,  with  all  its  elevation  of  the  divine  sovereignty,  was  nar- 
*  See  The  New  Englander  for  January,  1882,  vol,  v.,  p.  82. 


Xll  BIOGUAnilCAL   SKETCH 

row  and  mechanical.  Its  tlieodicy  failed  just  where  it  was  most 
needed.  It  placed  the  doctrine  of  election,  which  is  true  and 
scriptural  as  the  practical  corollary  of  the  divine  efficiency  in  re- 
generation and  sanctitication,  at  the  forefront  and  subordinated 
everything  to  it.  In  it  the  elect  were  everything,  and  everything 
was  for  the  elect ;  but  the  new  theology  finds  another  centre.  It 
is  fitting  that  Christ,  who  is  the  historical  centre  of  the  Christian 
religion,  as  he  is  the  vital  centre  of  his  church,  should  be  the  cen- 
tre of  the  theological  system.  About  him  all  the  truths  and  doc- 
trines grouiJ  themselves. 

His  ten  years  at  Bangor,  both  in  tlie  seminary  and  in 
the  religious  and  social  life  of  the  town,  were  marked  by 
varied  activity  as  well  as  ever-growing  influence  and  use- 
fulness. Sailing  up  the  Penobscot  for  the  first  time,  on  a 
lovely  October  day,  he  was  captivated  by  the  beauty  of 
the  place,  and  soon  became  very  fond  of  it.  Early  in 
1882  its  attractions  were  greatly  enhanced  by  his  mar- 
riage to  Miss  Elizabeth  Mann  Benson.  This  auspicious 
event  allied  him  also  by  fraternal  ties  to  his  colleague  in 
the  faculty,  Professor  Sewall.  The  new  home  brought 
him  constant  help  and  gladness,  and  called  into  play 
charming  domestic  qualities.  The  recollections  of  my 
repeated  visits  to  it  are  delightful.  "  Life  broadens  and 
grows  more  beautiful  in  every  way,  as  I  go  forward  into 
it,"  he  said.  As  husband,  father,  friend,  and  neighbor  he 
seemed  to  me  one  of  the  sweetest,  truest,  and  most  com- 
panionable of  men.  What  a  picture,  for  example,  was 
the  sight  of  him  leading  his  little  daughter  by  the  hand 
through  the  fine  seminary  grounds  !  In  walking  with 
him  along  the  streets  of  Bangor  I  observed  that  every- 
body appeared  to  know  and  to  like  him.  He  was  a 
special  favorite  of  his  neighbors,  the  late  ex- Vice  Presi- 
dent Hamlin  and  Chief-Justice  Appleton.  In  this  re- 
spect he  resembled  his  famous  uncle,  S.  S.  Prentiss, 
whose  society  and  talk  fascinated  old  men  of  wisdom  and 


BIOGRAPHICAL   SKETCH  Xlli 

cultm-e  quite  as  much  as  his  oratory  electrified  the  com- 
mon people.  Nor  was  Professor  Stearns's  usefulness  con- 
fined to  Bangor.  His  influence,  both  as  theologian  and 
preacher,  was  soon  felt  throughout  Maine.  It  was  his 
mother's  native  State  ;  old  kindred  and  friends  of  hers, 
met  him  wherever  he  went ;  while  interest  in  the  semi- 
nary and  his  seminary  work  deepened  more  and  more 
into  a  lively  interest  in  the  prosperity  of  the  churches 
with  which  from  the  first  the  institution  had  been  very 
closely  associated. 

Early  in  1890  Professor  Stearns  delivered  a  course  of 
lectures  in  Union  Seminary  on  the  Ely  foundation.  He 
was  not  a  little  perplexed  in  selecting  a  subject  for  this 
course.  In  a  letter  to  me,  dated  May  29,  1888,  he 
wrote  : 

Do  tell  me  if  you  have  any  more  suggestions  about  the  subject 
for  the  Ely  lectures.  As  I  think  the  matter  over,  without  being 
able  to  get  any  help  from  reading,  my  mind  gravitates  as  before 
to  a  doctrinal  subject.  What  do  you  think  of  "The  Argument 
for  the  Truth  of  Christianity  derived  from  the  Doctrine  of  the 
Atonement?"  If  the  atonement  is — as  undoubtedly  it  is— the 
central  doctrine  of  Christianity,  so  that  the  cross  is  not  only  the 
symbol  of  our  faith  but  the  exponent  of  its  inmost  and  most  es- 
sential meaning,  then  there  ought  to  be  in  it  a  stronger  evidence 
for  the  truth  of  the  whole  system  than  that  which  can  come  from 
any  other  source.  Instead  of  maintaining  a  continual  attitude  of 
defence  respecting  this  central  doctrine,  acting  as  if  we  ourselves 
doubted  its  reasonableness,  we  ought,  like  Paul,  to  run  the  stand- 
ard of  the  cross  up  to  the  masthead  and  draw  our  great  proof  of 
the  trath  of  Christianity  from  "  Christ  crucified,"  even  though  it 
seems  at  first  "unto  the  Jews  a  stumbling-block  and  unto  the 
Greeks  foolishness."  If  we  can  show  that  "the  foolishness  of  God 
is  wiser  than  men,  and  the  weakness  of  God  stronger  than  men," 
then  we  base  our  evidences  iipon  a  solid  rock.  I  recognize  the 
difiiculty  of  all  this,  especially  the  difficulty  of  mediating  between 
the  Christian  consciousness  and  the  natural  consciousness  with  re- 
gard to  a  doctrine  which  is  in  a  sense  esoteric  ;  but  I  can't  help 


XIV  BIOGKAPIIIOAL   SKETCH 

thiuking  that  I  see  light  with  regard  both  to  the  matter  and  the 
form  of  the*h,rgnment.  Quite  likely  I  should  fail,  biit  the  very  at- 
temi^t  would  open  the  way  for  some  one  else.  Sooner  or  later  the 
argument  must  be  brought  into  prominence.  The  old  external 
evidences  from  miracles  and  prophecy  are  now  inadequate ;  the 
popular  thought  of  our  day  treats  them  with  scant  respect.  The 
argument  from  Ciuistiau  experience  is  impregnable,  but  it  is  of 
limited  applicability.  Christianity  has  got  to  stand  or  fall  by  its 
essential  doctrines.  Wo  have  got  to  show  that  in  the  moral  and 
spiritual  sphere — to  say  nothing  of  the  lower  spheres — they  consti- 
tute the  only  practical  working  hypothesis,  that  is,  the  only  hypo- 
thesis that  will  correlate  and  ex^jlain  the  facts.  I  seem  to  see  a 
renewal  of  Constantine's  vision,  with  the  flaming  cross  pointing 
the  way  to  the  apologetics  of  the  future,  'Ev  tovtco  vIku  !  The  doc- 
trine of  the  atonement  is  the  doctrine  of  the  cross. 

He  finally  chose  as  his  theme  "  The  Evidence  of 
Christian  Experience,"  which  he  treated  with  snch  skill, 
learning,  and  spiritual  discernment  as  deeply  to  impress 
all  who  heard  him.  While  preparing  the  Ely  lectures 
his  eyes  gave  him  constant  trouble,  and  would  have 
forced  him  to  abandon  the  task,  had  not  the  eyes  of  his 
^\\ie  been  ever  at  his  service.  Alluding  to  this  trouble 
in  the  letter  just  quoted  he  adds  :  "  It  is  the  experience 
of  Tantalus  to  live  in  the  midst  of  books  and  not  to  be 
able  to  read  them.  Yet  I  doubt  not  the  Lord  has  some 
good  end  in  ^dew  in  appointing  me  this  discipline." 
The  discipline  was  at  times  severe,  and  for  more  tlian 
twenty  years  imposed  upon  him  painful  limitations  both 
in  study  and  in  his  work.  But  he  bore  it  bravely  and 
without  murmuring.  His  faith  in  the  ruliug  hand  of 
God,  touching  all  things  that  concerned  his  life,  whether 
great  or  small,  was  unswerving. 

In  the  early  summer  of  1890  Professor  Stearns  re- 
ceived a  unanimous  call  from  the  Union  Seminary  in  the 
city  of  New  York  to  the  chair  of  Systematic  Theology, 
made   vacant   by  the  resignation  of  Dr.  Shedd.     After 


BIOGKAPIIICAL    SKETCH  XV 

long  deliberation  and  sharp  mental  struggles,  lie  declined 
the  call  on  the  ground  that  he  could  not  take  the  sem- 
inary pledge.  A  few  extracts  from  his  letters  will  ex- 
plain the  attitude  of  his  mind  on  this  point.  The  first 
was  Avi'itten  in  November,  1889  ;  the  other  two  were 
wi-itten  after  he  had  received  the  call  to  New  York. 

"What  a  time  yon  are  having  about  revision  !  It  seems  as  if  the 
storm-centre  had  left  Congregationalism  and  were  concentrated 
over  Presbyterianism.  I  have  expected  the  question  to  come  up 
sooner  or  later,  but  did  not  su^jpose  that  the  demand  for  revi- 
sion would  be  so  extensive  and  loud.  I  trust  you  will  do  the 
work  thoroughly  and  not  by  halves.  For  my  own  part,  I  have 
not  so  much  objection  to  the  Westminster  Confession  as  some 
have.  But  it  is  a  millstone  around  the  neck  of  any  denomination, 
such  a  system  of  doctrine  as  that.  It  is  not  simply  its  Calvinism 
but  its  dogmatism  all  through.  Haven't  we  got  out  of  leading- 
strings  yet,  and  are  we  not  to  be  trusted  to  be  evangelical  ?  I 
used  to  feel  the  pressure  when  I  was  a  Presbyterian  pastor.  It 
did  not  satisfy  me  to  know  that  I  was  only  expected  to  take  the 
Confession  for  substance  of  doctrine.  I  am  a  great  deal  more  or- 
thodox now  than  then,  and  I  ascribe  it  largely  to  the  entire  free- 
dom of  thought  I  have  had  here  among  the  Congregationalists. 

It  is  not  that  my  theology  would  be  unacceptable  to  the  direc- 
tors and  constituency  of  Union  Seminary,  but  that  my  conscience 
will  not  allow  me  to  subscribe  in  what  would  be  for  me  a  strained 
and  non-natural  sense.  If  revision  were  consummated  the  case 
would  be  different.  Meantime  it  is  my  misfortune  (if  anything 
that  is  according  to  God's  will  is  a  misfortune),  to  receive  this 
very  honorable  and  generous  call  in  the  period  of  transition,  too 
early  to  share  in  the  benefits  of  revision,  and  too  late  to  ignore 
what  is  involved  in  subscription  as  the  Confession  stands  at  pres- 
ent. ...  I  am  not  an  Arminian,  but  I  am  not  a  Calvinist  in 
the  sense  in  which  I  have  supposed  the  Westminster  Confession 
to  be  Calvinistic. 

What  troubles  me  about  the  Confession  is  not  the  ipsissima 
verba  but  the  system.  It  seems  to  me  that  the  whole  Confession  is 
based  upon  the  view  that  salvation  is  placed  within  the  reach  of 
only  a  part  of  mankind.     To  the  rest,  though  they  have  a  larger 


XVI  BIOGRAPHICAL   SKETCH 

or  smaller  measure  of  common  grace,  the  i^ower  to  accept  Christ 
is  never  given.  This  doctrine,  if  I  rightly  aiopreheud  the  subject, 
dominates  the  whole  system  of  the  Confession. 

If  not  ready  to  accept  all  his  conclusions  on  the  sub- 
ject, I  none  the  less  admired  the  manly  spirit  and  the 
high  sense  of  duty  which  governed  his  own  decision  in 
the  case.* 

He  resumed  his  labors  at  Bangor  without  regret,  for 
his  own  conscience  had  closed  the  door  to  the  wider 
sphere  offered  him  in  New  York.  Bangor,  too,  had  for 
him  its  special  attractions.  The  students  admired  and 
loved  him ;  he  was  happy  in  the  confidence  and  affec- 
tion of  his  colleagues ;  and  he  liked  the  theological  quiet 
and  seclusion  of  the  place.  I  have  never  known  a  man 
so  able  and  highly  trained  who  troubled  himself  less 
about  position  or  reputation  in  the  world.  "  I  have  not 
(he  ^\T:ote  me)  so  far  as  I  know,  an  ambition  outside  of 
the  work  God  has  given  me  here,  but  I  have  a  strong 
ambition  to  do  that  well." 

About  this  time  he  was  requested  to  write  a  paper  on 
"  The  Present  Direction  of  Theological  Thought  in  the 
Congregational  Churches  of  the  United  States,"  to  be 
read  by  him  before  the  International  Congregational 
Council  at  London,  in  July,  1891,  as  a  representative  of 
Bangor  Seminary.  Owing  to  the  state  of  his  health  he 
at  first  declined  the  appointment ;  but  at  the  urgent  de- 
sire of  the  trustees  of  the  seminary  he  reconsidered  the 
matter  and  consented  to  go.  His  23aper  was  listened  to 
with  the  greatest  interest  and  received  unstinted  praise 

*  While  the  question  of  accepting  the  call  to  New  York  was  pend- 
ing, lie  made  a  visit  to  my  summer  home  in  Vermont,  in  order  to  meet 
there  President  Hastings  of  Union  Seminary,  and  to  confer  with  us 
on  the  subject.  It  was  our  last  interview  with  him,  and  left  iipon  us 
both  an  ineffaceable  impression  of  the  noble  sincerity,  tenderness,  and 
strength  of  his  Christian  character. 


BIOGRAPHICAL   SKETCH  XVH 

from  all  quarters.  Its  effect  is  thus  described  by  Dr.  N. 
G.  Clark,  the  honored  Secretary  of  the  American  Board, 
who  was  present  on  the  occasion  : 

He  appeared  on  the  i^latforni  a  comparatively  unknown  man ; 
lie  left  it  standing  side  by  side  with  Dale  and  Fairbairn— a  rec- 
ognized leader.  Though  taking  no  further  prominent  part  in  the 
services,  his  paper  was  referred  to  again  and  again  in  the  sub- 
sequent discussions.  We  doubt  if  any  paper  was  more  influential 
in  affecting  the  thought  and  sentiment  of  the  Council.  It  was 
needed  to  give  form  and  proportion  to  the  religious  sentiment  of 
our  English  friends,  and  to  hold  them  fast  to  the  great  fundamen- 
tal truths  of  Christianity  while  revolting  from  excessive  dogma. 
Tliis  was  a  valuable  service  rendered  to  the  English  delegates  in 
the  Council.  Professor  Stearns  helped  the  American  delegation  to 
realize,  as  never  before,  just  the  progress  we  had  made  on  more 
conservative  lines.  Some  one  was  needed  to  do  just  what  he  did, 
to  represent  the  progressive  conservatism  of  the  great  body  of  rev- 
erent Christian  thinkers,  not  only  of  our  denomination  but  the 
best  Christian  thought  of  all.* 

At  the  close  of  the  Council  he,  together  with  his  wife, 
made  a  journey  to  Norway,  and  then  passed  several  weeks 
in  Dresden.  Soon  after  reaching  home  he  was  elected  a 
corporate  member  of  the  American  Board,  and  appointed 
preacher  for  its  next  Annual  Meeting.  His  last  literary 
labor  was  Heney  Boynton  Smith,  which  he  had  been  re- 
quested to  prepare  for  the  "  American  Keligious  Leader 
Series."  It  appeared  soon  after  his  death,  and  was  re- 
ceived with  much  favor.  It  is  an  excellent  piece  of  bio- 
graphical work — bright,  discriminating,  and  true  to  the 
life. 

On  February  9,  1892,  after  a  brief  illness,  Professor 
Stearns,  then  in  the  forty-fifth  year  of  his  age,  passed 
suddenly  away  from  earth.  His  last  hours  were  full  of 
the  peace  which  comes  of  humble  submission  to  God's 
will  and  childlike  trust  in  the  Divine  Saviour,    Once  and 

*  The  London  address  will  be  found  at  the  end  of  this  volume. 
b 


XVIU  BIOGRAPHICAL   SKETCH 

again  lie  said,  "  I  die  in  the  old  faith."  Not  since  the 
triumphant  departure  of  Edward  Payson,  in  1827,  also  in 
his  forty-lifth  year,  had  a  greater  loss  befallen  the  Con- 
gregational churches  of  Maine.  Nor  was  the  loss  con- 
lined  to  Maine  or  to  Congregationalism  ;  it  was  keenly  felt 
by  Christian  scholars  in  all  New  England  and  through- 
out the  country.  A  genuine  theologian,  fully  equipped 
for  his  work  by  rich  gifts  of  both  nature  and  grace,  is  a 
rare  j^roduct  of  our  own  or  any  other  soil.  And  Lewis 
French  Stearns  had  just  come  to  be  recognized  as  such 
a  theologian.  The  tributes  to  his  memory  were  truly 
surprising  for  their  number  and  quality  ;  they  came 
from  far  and  near  and  were  all  of  a  piece.*  Those  who 
knew  him  best  admired  and  loved  him  most ;  but  none 
really  knew  him  without  admiring  and  loving  him.  He 
was  every  inch  a  man  ;  and  his  whole  manhood,  while 
seasoned  through  and  through  with  the  sweet  charities 
of  the  Gospel,  was  inspired  also  by  very  resolute  convic- 
tions of  truth  and  justice.  He  hated  all  the  unfair  and 
wrongful  means,  which  even  good  men  are  sometimes 
tempted  to  use  in  the  furtherance  of  what  they  deem 
righteous  ends.  He  held  it  as  much  a  sin  to  bear  false 
witness  against  an  infidel  as  against  a  Christian  ;  against 
a  Unitarian  or  Roman  Catholic  as  against  the  most  or- 
thodox Protestant.  He  was  explicit  and  decided  in  his 
opinions  about  parties  and  schools  and  individuals  ;  nor 
in  expressing  them  did  he  hesitate  to  make  free  use  of 
the  weapons  of  wit,  and  even  ridicule,  which  he  knew 
well  how  to  wield ;   but  whether  advocate  or  assailant, 

*  That  of  his  colleagues  will  be  found  in  the  very  thoughtful  and 
discriminating  Memorial  Address  by  Professor  F.  B.  Denio,  printed  in 
the  Andover  Review  for  July,  1892.  Not  less  striking  were  the  trib- 
utes of  trustees  of  the  Seminary  and  old  friends,  in  Maine  and  else- 
where, which  almost  filled  the  whole  number  of  The  Christian  Mirror 
for  March  12,  1892,  and  also  the  Word  and  Work  for  March,  1893. 


J5I0GRAPIIICAL   SKETCH  XIX 

be  held  fast  to  his  own  veracity  and  honor.  And  this  fine 
quality,  which  marked  his  personal  character,  pervaded 
his  teaching,  his  writings,  and  all  his  influence  as  a 
Christian  scholar.  I  never  knew  one  more  ingenuous 
and  whole-hearted  in  the  inquiry  of  truth.  In  this 
"  love-making  or  Avooing  "  of  truth,  as  Lord  Bacon  calls 
it,  his  will,  his  conscience,  and  his  best  afl'ections  were 
not  only  in  full  unison  with  the  intellectual  energ}^,  they 
were  part  and  parcel  of  it. 

In  argument  his  power  lay  very  much  in  the  patience 
and  scrupulous  care  with  which  he  studied,  as  well  as 
the  fairness  with  which  he  recognized,  the  strength  of 
his  opponent's  position.  It  came  also  in  part,  as  I 
think,  from  the  sense  of  humor,  which  was  one  of  his 
marked  characteristics  and  led  him  to  look  at  things  in  a 
broad  and  generous  way.  This  quick  sense  of  humor 
enlivened  his  whole  home-life  and  was  a  special  charm 
of  his  familiar  talk.  It  relieved  the  intensity  of  his 
mental  action,  and  served  to  lubricate  the  wheels  of  high- 
wrought  feeling  and  conviction.  Both  in  the  natural 
and  in  the  spiritual  spheres  how  much  the  cause  of  truth 
owes  to  this  genial  quality!  The  same  traits  that 
marked  him  as  a  seeker  after  truth  and  as  a  Christian 
scholar,  gave  him  his  power  as  a  teacher.  The  testi- 
mony of  his  pupils  on  this  point  is  most  interesting.  A 
member  of  the  Class  of  '82  writes : 

In  all  he  said  we  discerned,  the  humble  si)irit  of  a  sincere  seeker 
after  truth,  striving  to  make  his  own  deeper  thought  and  experi- 
ence of  aid  to  us  in  forming  clear  and  accurate  opinions.  He 
never  seemed  dogmatic  ;  but  we  had  no  doubt  of  the  positiveness 
of  his  views.  As  we  learned  to  know  him  we  felt  that  his  faith 
was  firmly  buttressed  by  conviction  of  truth  won  in  his  own  men- 
tal and  spiritual  conflicts.  So  conscientious  was  he  in  allowing 
full  weight  to  the  ideas  of  others,  that  some  who  heard  him  but 
seldom  may  have  feared  that  he  granted  too  much  to  those  who 


XX  BIOGRAPHICAL   SKETCH 

diifered  from  him  in  religious  views  ;  but  we  who  sat  at  his  feet, 
day  after  day,  realized  that  his  Christian  courtesy  was  joined  with 
unyielding  loyalty  to  the  great  truths  for  whose  promotion  the 
seminary  was  founded.  Under  his  direction  theology  seemed  no 
longer  a  dull  consideration  of  dogmatic  systems  of  the  past,  but  a 
living  study  of  j^ractical  bearing  upon  the  life  and  thought  of  the 
present.  He  was  more  than  a  wise  teacher.  Behind  his  office 
and  shown  in  all  his  official  as  well  as  private  intercourse  with  us 
was  the  sjoirit  of  a  devoted  Christian,  who  felt  in  his  own  exjieri- 
ence  the  helpful  power  of  the  truth  he  taught. 

A  member  of  the  Class  of  '84  writes  : 

I  entered  the  seminary  after  a  i^ainful  and  protracted  period  of 
doubt  on  almost  every  point  of  revealed  religion.  From  the  first 
I  felt  a  peculiar  helpfulness  in  the  class-room  of  Professor  Stearns. 
And  this  help  did  not  arise  alone  from  the  fact  that  he  taught 
theology  ;  it  came  from  the  man  himself.  Whether  correctly  or 
not,  I  felt  that  here  was  a  man  who  himself  had  known  doubts 
and  had  fought  through  them  to  the  truth.  That  he  had  settled 
all  questions  that  vex  the  scholars,  I  did  not  think,  nor  do  I  now. 
He  was  keenly  sensitive  to  all  the  questions  of  the  higher  criti- 
cism; he  had  more  than  a  passive  sympathy  with  newer  state- 
ments of  religious  truth,  and  his  mind  was  plainly  open  to  the 
entrance  of  new  light.  I  should  say  that  he  had  known  much  of 
impatience  with  the  older  and  sterner  and  more  dogmatic  the- 
ology, and  had  not  swung  back  quite  to  it  at  that  time.  I  do  not 
know  that  he  ever  did  ;  yet  I  have  evidence  from  all  later  classes 
that  in  every  successive  year  of  his  work  he  showed  signs  of  in- 
creasing willingness  to  accept  the  old  definitions,  in  some  cases 
where  the  newer  theories  did  not  supply  definitions  which  seemed 
to  him  to  fit  the  facts.  As  an  illustration,  the  anthropomorphic 
representations  of  God  were  very  distasteful  to  him  in  our  time  ; 
yet  it  was  told  me  that  later  he  did  not  hesitate  to  assert  that  God 
was  really  "  angry  "  with  the  wicked,  at  least  was  what  no  other 
word  would  so  nearly  express.  This  representation  to  me,  was  in 
harmony  with  the  impression  I  received  of  him  as  a  man  of  singu- 
larly open  mind,  never  stagnant,  never  satisfied  with  present  vis- 
ions of  truth,  always  eager  for  larger  visions,  and  for  statements 
that  would  exactly  fit  the  facts.     He  could  not  from  his  nature 


BIOGEAPHICAL   SKETCH  XXI 

Leli3  seeking  for  scientific  accuracy  in  statement ;  when  he  did 
not  find  it,  he  never  pretended  to  have  found  it. 

It  was  this  fact  in  his  intellectual  make-up,  which  made  him 
the  farthest  from  a  dogmatic  teacher.  He  was  so  scrupulous  in 
his  fairness,  that  he  sometimes  seemed  to  have  no  opinion  him- 
self in  his  effort  to  let  us  see  all  opinions  ;  indeed,  as  I  have  sug- 
gested, it  is  jjrobable  that  he  did  not  feel  so  sure  on  some  i^oints 
as  some  teachers ;  he  was  himself  a  student  with  us,  with  wonder- 
ful reach  of  vision,  grasp  of  all  the  elements  in  the  problem,  and 
an  analytic  faculty  which  was  keen  as  a  Damascus  blade.  If  he 
did  not  tell  us  where  the  truth  lay,  he  never  left  us  in  doubt  as 
to  where  it  could  not  lie.  This  element  in  his  method  was  of  un- 
told value  to  me,  in  my  then  condition,  and  laid  me  under  a  last- 
ing debt  of  gratitude  to  Professor  Stearns. 

A  member  of  the  Class  of  '86  writes  : 

In  the  class-room,  in  the  prayer-meeting,  in  the  pulpit  he 
always  helped  me,  but  more  than  by  what  he  said,  he  has  inspired 
me  by  what  he  ^oas.  By  his  unremitting  toil,  his  unassuming 
sj)irit,  his  fortitude  in  the  time  of  tribulation,  he  has  fulfilled  the 
jDrophecy  that  a  mmi  shall  be  as  a  hiding-place  from  the  wind,  and 
a  covert  from  the  tempest,  as  rivers  of  water  in  a  dry  place,  as  the 
shadow  of  a  great  rock  in  a  weary  land. 

He  was  practical,  he  was  sj)iritual.  I  felt  that  he  was  near  to 
me  and  yet  far  above  me.  Many  times  as  he  has  entered  the 
class-room  or  walked  through  the  seminary  grounds,  I  have  said 
to  myself  :   "  He  is  communing  with  God." 

"  There  are,  in  this  loud,  stunning  tide 

Of  human  care  and  crime, 
With  whom  the  melodies  abide 

Of  the  everlasting  chime  : 
Who  carry  music  in  their  heart 

Through  dusty  lane  and  wrangling  mart, 
Plying  their  daily  task  with  busier  feet, 
Because  their  secret  souls  a  holy  strain  repeat. " 

One  more  extract  from  tliese  grateful  tributes  must 
suffice  ;  it  speaks  for  tlie  Class  of  '93. 

It  seems  impossible  in  a  few  words  to  say  anything  at  all  ade- 
quate about  that  character  which  was  so  bright,  so  many-sided, 


XXll  BIOGRAPHICAL   SKETCH 

and  witlial  so  simple,  so  trans2:)arent.  lu  the  class-room  or  out  of 
it,  in  society  or  in  the  home,  his  bearing  was  always  that  of  a  re- 
fined Christian  gentleman.  He  never  varied,  he  never  changed, 
excei)t  to  show  more  and  more  to  those  who  knew  him  the  beauty 
of  his  richly  endowed  nature.  Great  as  our  loss  is,  yet  our  gain  is 
greater  in  having  been  the  last  class  to  sit  under  his  instruction, 
and  to  receive  the  parting  benediction  of  a  life  that  was  so  full 
of  God  and  Christ.  His  dying  message  to  us  was  in  these  words  : 
"  Tell  my  dear  Middle  Class  that  nothing  is  of  importance  to  them 
excejjt  to  know  Jesus  Christ  as  their  divine  Lord  and  Master." 

We  who  so  recently  were  accustomed  to  meet  him  day  after 
day  can  testify  that  the  ineffable  charm  of  his  character  lay  in 
the  fact  that  he  lived  so  near  to  Christ.  His  Saviour  was  a  living, 
ever-present  Saviour.  He  drank  deeply  of  the  water  of  life,  and 
always  seemed  to  be  overflowing  with  the  great,  joyous  truths  re- 
vealed by  God  in  Christ.  There  was  something  spontaneous  in 
every  word  that  he  uttered.  The  prayer,  offered  at  the  beginning 
of  each  recitation,  never  failed  by  its  sim))le  directness  to  imi:)ress 
us  with  the  solemnity  of  the  work  before  us.  And  so  everywhere, 
whether  in  the  class-room  or  prayer-meeting,  his  strong,  earnest 
words  came  from  the  abundance  of  the  heart.  His  words,  but  more 
than  all,  his  spirit,  inspired  us  with  more  love  for  our  Saviour,  with' 
a  higher  conception  of  the  responsibility  of  our  calling,  with  a  more 
fervid  longing  in  the  prayer,  "Thy  kingdom  come."  He  taught 
us  that  bi-eadth  of  view  was  to  be  obtained  only  by  prayer,  and  by 
a  deep,  searching  study  of  God's  Word.  In  a  word,  by  his 
own  unselfish  life  and  his  teachings  he  helloed  us  to  realize  the 
noble  possibilities  of  an  ideal  Christian  manhood. 

The  subject  of  this  brief  sketch  was  very  dear  to  me 
both  for  his  mother's  sake  and  his  own.  Had  he  been 
my  son  or  younger  brother,  I  could  hardly  have  loved 
him  better.  His  letters,  always  bright,  scholarly,  affec- 
tionate, and  full  of  high  aspirations,  were  to  me  for  years 
a  solace  and  refreshment.  Intercourse  and  talk  with 
him  revived  the  pleasantest  memories  of  his  father  and 
of  Henry  B.  Smith,  his  father's  friend  and  my  own.  I 
never  doubted  that  he  would  survive  me  a  score  or  more 
of  years,  and  would  yet  render  invaluable  aid  to  the 


BIOGRAPHICAL   SKETCH  XXlll 

good  old  cause,  wliicli  in  their  day  and  generation  those 
two  admirable  men  served  so  well.  But  visum  aliter  Deo. 
As  the  heavens  are  higher  than  the  earth,  so  are  His 
ways  higher  than  our  ways.  He  knows  when  it  is  best 
to  call  His  children  home  to  Himself.  It  is  a  very 
blessed  thing  to  follow  Christ  by  faith  here  in  time  ;  but 
how  much  more  blessed  still  to  see  Him  face  to  face, 
and  to  follow  Him,  whithersoever  He  goeth,  in  the  life 
everlasting ! 

The  present  volume  was  written  three  or  four  years  be- 
fore Dr.  Stearns's  death.  It  aims  to  set  forth  and  discuss 
in  popular  form  the  leading  doctrines  of  Christianity. 
Had  the  author's  life  been  spared  the  work  would  doubt- 
less have  been  carefully  revised  by  him,  if  not  rewritten. 
Just  before  his  death  he  directed  that  the  MS.  should  be 
submitted  to  his  brother-in-law.  Dr.  Sewall,  of  Bangor. 
Dr.  Fisher,  of  New  Haven,  and  myself  ;  and  that,  if  we 
so  advised,  it  should  be  given  to  the  public.  The  fol- 
lowing letter  from  Dr.  Fisher  expresses  our  common 
feeling  and  judgment : 

New  Haven,  December  14,  1892. 

My  Dear  Dr.  Prentiss  :  My  first  particular  knowledge  of  Pro- 
fessor Stearns  was  obtained  from  the  reading  of  his  Inaugural  Ad- 
dress at  Bangor.  The  address  struck  me  at  once  as  having  "  the 
true  ring."  Here,  I  said  to  myself,  is  a  theologian  who  looks  at 
things  with  an  open  eye,  sees  clearly  what  are  the  fundamental 
questions,  and  is  capable  of  bringing  to  the  discussion  of  them  a 
sincere  Christian  spirit,  and  a  refined,  cultivated  intellect.  His 
subsequent  publications  have  fully  borne  out  this  first  impression. 
His  work  on  the  "Evidence  of  Christian  Experience  "  is  one  of 
the  most  noted  theological  productions  of  our  time.  The  learn- 
ing at  the  basis  of  it  is  unobtrusive,  but  broad  and  accurate  ;  the 
reasoning  is  careful ;  the  religious  sentiment  that  pervades  the 
book  is  deep  and  genuine ;  the  style  is  appropriate.  The  paper 
■which  Professor  Stearns  read  at  the  Congregational  Council  in 
London  was  a  difficult  one  to  prepare.    He  had  to  touch  upon 


XXIV  BIOGKAPHICAL   SKETCH 

questions  wbicli  were  warmly  controverted  among  Congregation- 
alists  in  this  country.  He  spoke  with  frankness,  without  the 
slightest  attempt  to  take  refuge  in  ambiguities,  and  yet  he  spoke 
so  fairly  and  judiciously  as  to  win  universal  commendation.  In 
his  life  of  Professor  Henry  B.  Smith,  Professor  Stearns  illustrated 
his  admirable  qualifications  as  a  theological  critic.  There  is 
thorough  insight  and  genial  appreciation.  Yet  the  author's  rev- 
erent regard  for  the  character  and  teachings  of  the  subject  of  the 
biography,  subtracts  nothing  from  the  independence  of  his  judg- 
ment. Wherever  he  finds  occasion  for  dissent,  he  does  not  hesi- 
tate to  express  it. 

Professor  Stearns  was  one  of  the  few  men  among  us,  still  com- 
paratively young,  who  took  up  from  choice  and  pursued  with  ac- 
knowledged ability  and  success,  the  branch  of  dogmatic  theology. 
Of  late,  exegesis  and  history,  along  with  Biblical  theology,  have 
exerted  an  unwonted  attraction.  Professor  Stearns  did  not  fail  to 
lay  a  strong  foundation  by  making  himself  well  acquainted  with 
these  favorite  departments  of  stridy.  But  his  chosen  field  was 
dogmatics.  He  made  it  his  purpose  to  set  forth,  in  a  systematic 
form,  and  to  defend  on  scriptural  and  rational  grounds,  the  doc- 
trines of  the  Christian  faith.  This  circumstance  renders  his  de- 
parture from  life,  at  an  age  when  his  task  was  incomi^lete,  a  loss 
which  is  most  keenly  felt.  A  conservative,  he  was,  nevertheless, 
the  foe  of  obscurantism.  He  ajipreciated  the  value  of  that  reason- 
able liberty  of  religious  thought,  without  which  intellectual  life 
in  the  church  languishes,  and  progress  in  the  understanding  of 
Christianity  is  impossible. 

The  opportunity  which  I  have  had  to  peruse,  in  manuscript,  the 
work  of  Professor  Stearns,  which  is  now  to  be  given  to  the  press, 
has  convinced  me  that,  although  it  is  not  all  that  he  would  have 
made  it  to  be,  it  deseiTes  to  be  published.  The  comj^arative  lack 
of  catechetical  instruction  in  families  and  churches  in  these  days 
is  insufSciently  supplied  by  Sunday-schools.  There  is  a  need  of 
works  that  shall  present  in  a  clear  and  orderly  manner  the  doctrines 
of  the  Christian  system,  and  the  grounds  that  justify  belief  in  them. 
This  benefit,  I  am  persuaded,  the  projwsed  vohime  will  confer. 

I  always  thought  of  Professor  Stearns,  while  he  was  living,  with 
respect  and  affection,  and  now  that  he  has  gone,  I  cherish  for  him 
a  tender  regard.  But  you,  who  knew  him  so  well,  are  best  quali- 
fied to  do  justice  to  his  personal  traits. 

Very  sincerely  yours, 

George  P.  Fishek. 


PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 


THE  NATURAL  REVELATION  OF  GOD 

Is  there  a  God  ?  and  can  He  be  known  ?  These  are 
the  two  great  questions  which  challenge  us,  as  we  stand 
upon  the  threshold  of  theology,  and  demand  an  answer. 
They  are  questions  which  the  majority  of  men  never  ask. 
The  unsophisticated  mind,  whether  in  heathen  or  Chris- 
tian lands,  believes  implicitly  in  the  existence  of  God  or 
of  the  gods,  and  has  some  conception  of  the  divine  nature. 
It  is  only  when  men  begin  to  philosophize  that  they  be- 
come sceptics. 

It  is  our  lot  to  live  in  an  age  and  a  land  where  philoso- 
phizing is  all  too  familiar.  About  us,  on  every  side,  are 
those  who  deny  or  call  in  question  the  two  fundamental 
facts  of  religion  and  theology,  the  existence  of  God  and  the 
ability  of  men  to  know  Him.  We  must  therefore  be  ready 
to  give  a  reason  for  the  faith  that  is  in  us.  It  will  not  be 
enough  to  declare  that  religion  is  universal  and  that  the 
postulate  of  religion  is  God.  We  must  marshal  our  proofs 
and  justify  our  faith  to  the  reason  of  our  fellow-men.  This 
much  even  the  sceptic  has  a  right  to  demand  of  us. 

What,  then,  is  the  proof  that  God  exists  and  that  He 
may  be  known?  Paul  has  declared  it — "Because  that 
which  may  be  known  of  God  is  manifest  in  them ;  for  God 
hath  showed  it  unto  them.     For  the  invisible  thing-s  of 


2  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

liim  from  the  creation  of  the  world  are  clearly  seen,  being 
understood  by  the  things  that  are  made,  even  his  eternal 
power  and  Godhead ;  so  that  they  are  without  excuse " 
(Rom.  i.  19,  20).  We  know  that  God  is  and  what  He  is 
because  He  reveals  both  His  existence  and  His  nature  to 
every  man,  even  to  those  who  do  not  accept  the  revela- 
tion. Over  against  the  atheist's  denial  and  the  agnostic's 
ignorance  we  set  the  Apostle's  "  what  may  be  known  of 
God,"  TO  'yvwcxTov  tov  S^eov  over  against  to  ayvcoarov. 

The  object  of  this  chapter  is  to  set  forth  the  proof  of 
God's  existence  and  the  knowledge  of  His  nature  which 
are  furnished  by  His  universal  revelation  of  Himself. 

I.  First,  then,  the  proof  of  God's  existence  is  the  revela- 
tion of  Himself  which  He  has  made. 

1.  Let  us  stop  a  moment  to  inquire  what  is  meant  by 
revelation.  And  here  the  etymology  of  the  word  shall  be 
our  guide.  It  is  from  the  Latin  revelare,  to  draw  back  a 
veil.  Revelation  is  God's  unveiling  of  Himself,  His  with- 
drawal of  the  curtain  which  hides  Him  from  men.  Mis- 
taken conceptions  obscure  the  simple  idea.  "We  have 
been  used  to  think  of  revelation  as  the  communication  of 
a  system  of  doctrine  or  of  a  moral  and  religious  code. 
]^ow,  undoubtedly  these  ideas  are  included  in  the  complete 
conception  of  revelation.  But  in  its  highest  and  truest 
sense  the  term  implies  not  so  much  the  giving  of  knowl- 
edge about  God,  as  the  knowledge  of  God  Himself.  It 
implies  an  activity  on  the  side  of  God  and  a  corresponding 
receptivity  on  the  side  of  men.  God  manifests  Himself. 
Lie  makes  Himself  known.  Men  know  Him  because  He 
comes  near  to  them  and  causes  them  to  realize  His 
presence. 

2.  To  proceed,  when  we  prove  God's  existence  from 
His  self-revelation,  we  do  not  employ  any  unfamiliar  or 
illegitimate  method  of  reasoning.  In  the  same  way  we 
prove  the  existence  of  the  three  other  great  realities 
which  share  with  the  knowledge  of  God  the  possession  of 


THE  NATURAL  REVELATION  OF  GOD        3 

our  consciousness.  How  do  we  know  tliat  the  world  ex- 
ists ?  How  do  we  know  that  the  invisible  spirits  of  our 
fellow-men  exist  ?  How  do  we  know  that  we  ourselves 
exist  ?  The  answer  is  simple.  We  know  the  existence  of 
the  world,  our  fellow-men,  and  ourselves  because  they 
manifest  themselves  as  realities  to  our  consciousness — in 
other  words,  because  they  reveal  themselves  to  us.  All 
knowledge  is  in  a  true  sense  revelation. 

Look  at  the  external  w^orld.  It  appears  as  a  perma- 
nent and  unchanging  element  in  our  consciousness.  We 
cannot  think  or  act  except  upon  the  assumption  of  its 
reality.  It  resists  every  effort  to  reduce  it  to  a  merely 
subjective  impression.  I  cannot  doubt  that  there  is  real 
world  there.  I  know  it  because  it  makes  itself  known  to 
me.  And  this  truth,  which  is  reached  by  a  psj'ch ©logical 
process,  is  confirmed  by  the  light  which  physical  science 
throws  upon  the  matter.  It  tells  us  that  nothing  in 
nature  is  passive.  Everything  is  manifesting  itself,  and 
all  that  is  needed  to  turn  its  manifestation  into  a  revela- 
tion is  the  presence  of  a  receptive  soul.  Yon  see  before 
you  a  lump  of  dead  matter,  metal  or  stone.  You  see  it  ? 
What  does  that  mean  ?  It  means  that  this  seemingly 
inert  mass  is  instinct  with  activity,  and  that  it  manifests 
itself  to  you  through  that  activity.  The  shivering  mole- 
cules set  in  motion  invisible  waves  in  the  sether,  which 
break  upon  the  retina  of  your  eye  like  the  surf  upon  the 
beach  and  carry  inward  to  your  soul  the  knowledge  of  the 
object.  There  is  nothing  in  the  external  world  that  has 
not  this  power  of  revelation  or  manifestation.  Otherwise 
it  would  be  to  all  intents  and  purposes  a  nonentity. 
There  is  truth  in  Leibnitz's  maxim,  that  what  does  not 
act  does  not  exist,  "  qui  non  agit  non  existitP 

Or  consider  our  knowledge  of  our  fellow-men.  This, 
too,  is  an  indestructible  element  of  consciousness.  We 
know  their  existence  because  they  reveal  themselves  to 
us.      Outwardly   there    is   nothing   to   distinguish   them 


L 


4  PRESENT   DAY    THEOLOGY 

from  the  material  things  by  which  they  are  surrounded. 
Tlie  spirit  is  invisible.  The  body  is  not  the  man.  The 
gestures,  the  looks,  the  words  are  only  symbols  or 
mediums.  But  through  words  and  acts,  as  well  as  in 
ways  which  betoken  a  nearer  contact  of  spirit  with  spirit, 
and  which  science  fails  to  explain,  the}^  reveal  themselves 
to  us,  and  we  can  no  more  doubt  the  reality  of  their 
existence  than  we  can  that  of  the  world. 

And  so  of  our  knowledge  of  ourselves.  Who  questions 
the  existence  of  the  self-conscious,  self-determining  Ego 
or  I?  When  we  wish  to  express  the  highest  degree  of 
assurance  respecting  anything,  we  say,  "  I  am  as  certain  of 
it  as  I  am  of  my  own  existence."  But  how  does  self 
make  itself  known  ?  It  reveals  itself  in  consciousness.  I 
know  that  I  exist  because  there  is  the  I  revealing  itself  to 
me,  myself  to  myself. 

Now  not  different  is  it  with  the  proof  of  the  divine 
existence.  We  know  that  God  exists  because  He  reveals 
Himself  to  us.  It  is  a  fact  which  may  stand  as  sure  to 
us  as  our  self-existence  or  the  existence  of  our  fellow-men 
and  of  the  world.  We  use  in  its  behalf  precisely  the 
same  kind  of  proof.  There  in  our  consciousness  are 
manifestations  of  the  divine.  When  Herbert  Spencer 
says  that  the  existence  of  God  is  a  "  necessary  datum  of 
consciousness,"  he  concedes  all  that  the  theist  needs  as  the 
starting-point  of  his  argument.  It  is  a  curious  fact  that 
the  philosophers  who  deny  or  call  in  question  the  divine 
existence  always  do  the  same  by  some,  if  not  all,  of  the 
other  three  realities.  The  four  stand  or  fall  together. 
They  are  the  four  pillars  upon  which  the  edifice  of  human 
certainty  rests. 

3.  We  pass  now  to  consider  the  particular  arguments 
for  the  divine  existence.  After  our  discussion  of  the 
nature  of  the  proof,  we  shall  not  be  at  a  loss  to  discover 
these.  Every  mode  of  the  divine  self-revelation  will 
furnish  us  with  an  argument.     Light  and  heat  and  gravi- 


THE  NATURAL  EEVELATION  OF  GOD        5 

tation  are  all  modes  of  the  sun's  manifestation,  and  they 
are  all  proofs  of  its  existence.  If  anyone  were  rash 
enough  to  deny  that  there  is  a  sun,  I  should  refute  his 
assertion  by  presenting  these  and  like  evidences.  So  if 
anyone  is  rash  enough  to  deny  the  existence  of  God,  the 
disproof  will  lie  in  the  exhibition  of  the  various  modes  in 
which  God  reveals  Himself  to  us. 

We  may  accordingly  distinguish  six  different  ways  in 
which  the  revelation  of  God  comes  to  us,  which  furnish 
us  with  as  many  lines  of  argument  for  His  existence. 
God  makes  Himself  known  in  the  experiences  of  the 
religious  life,  in  conscience  and  the  moral  order  of  the 
world,  in  the  existence  and  activities  of  the  human  soul, 
in  the  rationality  and  design  evident  in  the  world,  in  the 
existence  of  the  world  itself  as  an  effect  and  dependent 
form  of  being,  and  in  the  necessary  idea  of  the  Absolute 
as  it  appears  in  every  soul.  These  modes  of  the  divine 
self-revelation  give  us  what  the  theologians  call  the 
Religious,  the  Moral,  the  Psychological,  the  Teleological, 
the  Cosmological  and  the  Ontological  arguments.  Let  us, 
so  far  as  our  time  will  permit,  consider  each. 

(1)  The  religious  proof  is  that  which  is  in  some  re- 
spects more  readily  applied  than  any  other.  'No  learning 
or  mental  discipline  is  necessary  in  order  to  understand  it. 
It  is  open  at  once  to  the  savage  and  the  civilized  man,  to 
the  heathen  and  the  Christian,  to  the  child  and  the  per- 
son of  mature  age.  It  is  the  proof  derived  from  personal 
experience  in  the  religious  life  of  the  reality  and  power  of 
God.  In  the  practical  exercises  of  religion  men  find 
themselves  in  spiritual  contact  with  God,  and  know  that 
they  are  in  such  contact.  A  certainty  of  God's  existence 
is  awakened  which  to  him  who  possesses  it  has  the  highest 
degree  of  validity.  The  divine  presence  is  manifested  not 
only  in  the  intellect  but  in  the  feelings  and  the  will.  And 
just  in  proportion  as  a  man  yields  himself  to  the  divine 
influence  does  this  assurance  of  God's  existence  burn  with 


6  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

a  pure  and  steady  flame  upon  the  altar  of  his  soul.  If  we 
believe  that  God  works  in  every  soul,  we  shall  see  reason 
to  think  that  this  proof  to  some  extent  influences  every 
man,  so  that  even  the  professed  atheist  is  in  his  better 
moments  open  to  an  argument  drawn  from  the  experiences 
of  his  own  inner  life.  But  the  proof  finds  its  full  force 
only  where  there  is  a  receptive  heart.  It  is  a  subjective 
certainty  which  is  produced,  valid  onl}^  for  the  possessor. 
Yet  even  this  statement  must  be  qualified,  for  a  strong  in- 
dividual conviction  is  contagious,  and  doubtless  in  many 
cases  the  faith  of  the  individual  is  the  flame  at  which  the 
faith  of  others  is  lighted.  As  has  been  said,  it  is  a  proof 
which  is  open  to  the  heathen  as  well  as  the  Christian. 
The  true  Light  lighteth  every  man  that  cometh  into  the 
world.  But  this  argument  reaches  its  most  complete  and 
satisf actor}'  form  in  the  experience  of  the  Christian.  The 
Spirit  beareth  witness  with  his  spirit  that  he  is  the  child 
of  God.  The  presence  of  God  in  his  soul  is  verified  by 
his  deepest  and  most  sacred  spiritual  exercises.  He  who 
has  learned  to  know  God  in  Christ  has  that  certainty  of 
Him  which  is  itself  the  assurance  of  eternal  life. 

(2)  The  moral  argument  comes  to  us  along  the  line  of 
a  twofold  revelation  of  God,  namely,  in  conscience  and  in 
the  moral  order  of  the  world. 

This  is  not  the  place  to  give  a  formal  definition  of  con- 
science. Sufiice  it  here  to  say  that  it  is  that  within  us 
which  distinguishes  between  right  and  wrong  and  lays  ob- 
ligation upon  us  to  do  the  right.  It  stands  alone  in  the 
soul  as  something  which  although  in  us  is  yet  not  of  us. 
It  speaks  with  authority,  laying  commands  upon  us,  testi- 
fying to  a  law  to  which  we  owe  obedience.  Its  "categori- 
cal imperative,"  as  Kant  calls  it,  brooks  no  questioning,  and 
we  cannot  but  acknowledge  its  right  over  us.  Now  how 
shall  we  explain  conscience  ?  It  is  not  the  voice  of  our 
own  natures,  for  our  nature  struggles  against  conscience 
and  would  repudiate  it,  if  it  could.     It  is  not  the  voice  of 


1 


THE  NATURAL  EEVELATION  OF  GOD        7 

our  fellow-meu,  for  of  that  conscience  is  itself  the  judge. 
We  exphiin  it  best  when  we  2-egard  it  as  the  mouth-piece 
of  a  higher  voice,  even  the  voice  of  God.  And  the  God 
thus  revealed  to  us  is  a  personal  Being.  Only  a  personal 
will  can  command  our  will.  When  in  the  silence  of  our 
souls  conscience  raises  her  voice  of  command  or  threaten- 
ing, from  the  Sinai-height  of  a  righteous  law  the  living 
God  Himself  is  speaking  to  our  souls. 

And  there  is  also  a  moral  order  at  work  in  the  world 
which  reveals  the  existence  of  God.  Human  society  is 
built  up  upon  the  foundation  of  the  moral  law.  Its  in- 
stitutions I'equire  for  their  normal  and  successful  working 
conformity  to  the  principles  of  right.  Thus  immorality 
breaks  down  the  family  and  injustice  the  state.  The 
world  is  so  constituted  that  in  the  long  run,  if  not  at  every 
time  and  in  every  place,  right  conduct  brings  happiness 
and  wrong  conduct  brings  suffering.  And  more  than  this, 
there  is  evidence  that  a  righteous  Will  is  ruling  the 
world,  so  that  slowly  but  surely  the  right  is  triumphing 
and  the  wrong  is  going  under.  Even  disbelievers  in  a 
personal  God,  like  Matthew  Arnold,  are  compelled  to  rec- 
ognize a  "Power  not  ourselves  that  makes  for  righteous- 
ness." It  is  true  that  in  a  world  of  sin  like  ours  there  are 
many  facts  that  seem  to  break  the  force  of  this  argument. 
But  rightly  understood,  instead  of  telling  against  the  di- 
vine existence,  they  point  to  a  life  beyond  the  present,  in 
which  the  divine  righteousness  will  have  full  scope  to 
work  out  its  holy  purposes.  Kant's  chief  argument  for 
the  divine  existence  is  derived  from  these  very  facts.  He 
ui-ges  that  there  must  be  a  God  to  reward  suffering  ffood- 
ness  with  happiness  in  another  world,  and  to  bring  de- 
served retribution  upon  prosperous  and  insolent  evil- 
doing. 

(3)  Once  more  God  reveals  Himself  in  the  constitution 
and  operations  of  the  human  soul.  This  gives  us  the  psy- 
chological  argument.     How   shall  we  explain  the   exist- 


8  PRESENT   BAY   THEOLOGY 

ence  of  the  soul  ?  Man  stands  high  above  both  the  unin- 
telligent world  and  the  animal.  He  is  a  person,  with  all 
that  that  implies,  a  self-conscious  being,  possessed  of  free- 
dom, guided  by  reason,  as  well  as  a  moral  and  religious 
being.  "  What  a  piece  of  work  is  man  !  How  noble  in 
reason  !  how  infinite  in  faculty  !  in  form  and  moving, 
how  express  and  admirable  !  in  action,  how  like  an  angel ! 
in  appreliension,  how  like  a  god  !  "  But  who  was  the 
workman  that  made  this  piece  of  work  ?  Nature  ?  Nat- 
ure is  nothing  but  matter  and  energy.  We  must  have  a 
sufficient  cause.  But  here  is  one  that  is  utterly  insufficient. 
We  explain  the  statue  by  the  skill  of  the  artist  who 
moulds  the  marble.  But  here  the  marble  makes  the 
statue.  Or  is  the  cause  evolution  ?  Evolution  is  nothing 
but  a  law  ;  it  is  not  a  cause  ;  and  even  as  a  law  evolution 
fails  to  explain  the  soul  of  man.  Xone  but  a  Spirit, 
higher  and  greater  than  the  human  spirit,  can  be  the  cause 
of  this  wondrous  being.  Kor  must  we  confine  our  argu- 
ment to  the  constitution  of  the  soul.  Its  activities  re- 
quire for  their  explanation  the  presence  and  power  of  a 
higher  Spirit,  in  wdiom  we  "  live  and  move  and  have  our 
being."  "The  spirit  of  man  is  the  candle  of  the  Lord." 
Only  upon  the  assumption  that  God  exists  and  that  He 
energizes  in  every  soul  can  we  explain  the  ongoings  of  the 
soul  itself. 

(4)  The  teleological  argument  is  derived  from  the  rev- 
elation of  the  divine  thought  in  nature.  The  world  is 
instinct  with  reason.  It  is  not  an  aggregate  of  accidental 
forms  but  an  ordered  system.  Everywhere  there  is  I'ation- 
ality,  that  is,  relations  which  only  reason  can  discover  and 
which  can  be  explained  only  upon  the  assumption  that 
they  are  the  result  of  a  supreme  Reason.  What  we  call 
the  laws  of  nature,  the  observed  uniformities  in  the  opei-a- 
tion  of  the  natural  forces,  are  ideal  principles,  the  expres- 
sion of  thought,  inherent  in  things  as  their  regulative 
principles,  yet  not  to  be  explained  through  matter  and 


THE  NATUEAL  REVELATION"  OF  GOD        9 

energy.  The  fabric  of  nature  is  built  up  upon  mathe- 
matical principles,  like  the  work  of  the  human  engineer. 
Agassiz  could  as  truly  as  beautifully  call  the  "  natural 
system"  of  zoology  "a  translation  of  the  Creator's 
thoughts  into  human  language."  Or,  to  take  an  example 
even  more  striking,  consider  the  beauty  in  natui-e.  What 
is  beauty  ?  Not  matter,  not  enei'gy,  not  any  combination 
of  matter  or  energy.  We  have  all  heard  of  the  artist  who 
mixed  his  colors  with  brains.  The  colors  of  nature  are 
mixed  with  brains.  Mind  alone  perceives  beaut3^  Mind 
alone  can  have  originated  it.  It  demands  for  its  explana- 
tion a  supreme  Beauty,  One  "  altogether  lovely."  And 
then,  when  we  come  to  the  adaptations  of  nature,  with  their 
evidences  of  design,  the  argument  becomes  even  more 
convincing.  Purpose,  skill,  design  alone  explain  the  ad- 
justments of  the  heavenly  bodies,  the  relations  of  the 
vegetable  and  animal  kingdoms,  the  process  of  develop- 
ment from  theprotozoon  to  man,  the  adaptation  of  organs 
to  their  functions,  the  arrangements  of  human  society, 
the  events  of  human  histor3^ 

There  was  a  time,  not  long  since,  when  the  theory  of 
oro;anic  and  inoro;anic  evolution  seemed  to  have  shattered 
the  argument  from  design.  But  closer  acquaintance  with 
this  wonderful  hypothesis,  which,  although  yet  unproved 
and  doubtless  greatly  to  be  modified,  carries  with  it  so 
great  a  M^eight  of  probability,  has  shown  that  it  is  a  friend 
rather  than  an  enemy  of  the  argument  from  evidences  of 
design.  It  has  taught  us  to  look  less  at  the  part  and  more 
at  the  whole.  It  has  revealed  to  us  a  vast  plan  slowly 
wrought  out  from  the  beginning.  It  has  given  us  an  ex- 
planation of  many  parts  of  the  divine  work,  where  before 
we  had  to  receive  it  as  a  mere  mystery  of  power.  It  has 
enlarged  our  view  of  the  divine  Wisdom  which  from  the 
beginning  has  been  shaping  all  things  with  reference  to 

"  Tliat  far-off  divine  event, 
Toward  which  the  whole  creation  moves." 


10  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

(5)  Again,  God  reveals  Himself  as  tbe  First  Cause  of 
the  world  and  the  Ground  of  its  continued  existence.  The 
cosmological  argument  bases  itself  upon  the  principle  of 
causality.  The  world  about  us  is  an  effect.  We  begin 
with  any  object  and  go  backward  in  time,  seeking  its  ulti- 
mate cause.  But  each  cause  proves  to  be  itself  an  effect, 
and  we  go  on  indefinitely  in  a  fruitless  search  till  we 
are  lost  in  an  endless  series.  We  fare  no  better  when  we 
seek  a  ground  for  all  things.  Everything  is  dependent 
upon  something  else.  Starting  from  any  point,  we  may 
go  outward  in  space,  seeking  something  on  which  all  things 
depend,  but  which  itself  depends  on  nothing.  But  again 
we  are  baffled.     And  thus  our  loo;ic  brings  us  to  a  divine 

O  CD 

First  Cause,  One  who  has  made  all  things  and  in  whom  all 
things  consist,  the  Creator,  the  Preserver,  the  Governor  of 
the  Universe. 

Here,  once  more,  popular  objections  are  raised  from  the 
side  of  evolution,  popular,  I  say,  because  the  true  man  of 
science  agrees  with  Huxley  when  he  says  {Nineteenth 
Century^  vol.  xix.,  p.  202) : 

"Now  it  appears  to  me  that  the  scientific  investigator  is 
wholly  incompetent  to  say  anything  at  all  about  the  first 
origin  of  the  material  universe.  The  whole  power  of  his 
organon  vanishes  when  he  has  to  step  beyond  the  chain 
of  natural  causes  and  effects." 

But  there  are  many,  not  so  wise,  who  think  that  evolu- 
tion does  away  with  the  necessity  of  a  Creator.  Yet  what 
is  evolution  ?  As  has  been  already  said,  it  is  only  a  law,  not 
a  cause  ;  it  shows  us  the  method  but  not  the  power  which 
has  brought  about  the  present  forms  of  the  inorganic  and 
organic  worlds.  Evolution  itself  requires  a  divine  Cause 
behind  it.  Clerk  Maxwell  said  ("Life,"  p.  330),  "  I  have 
looked  into  most  philosophical  systems,  and  I  have  seen 
that  none  will  work  without  a  God."  The  same  may  be 
said  of  evolution,  whether  we  regard  it  as  a  philosophy  or 


THE   NATURAL   EEVELATIOlSr   OF   GOD  11 

as  a  working  hypothesis  of  science  :  it  will  not  work  with- 
out a  God — an  ever-present,  living  God,  continually  ener- 
gizing in  nature.  Moreover,  there  are  gaps  in  the  natural 
history  of  the  universe  which  evolution  has  never  filled 
up  and  probably  never  will  fill  up — besides  the  original 
creation,  the  transition  from  inorganic  matter  to  life,  and 
the  transition  from  the  animal  to  man.  We  might  add, 
though  with  more  doubt,  the  transition  from  the  vegetable 
to  the  animal,  and  from  some  of  the  species  to  their  next 
following  species.  If  everywhere  in  the  course  of  evolu- 
tion God's  providence  is  required,  at  these  points  we  have 
need  of  His  creative  power. 

Or  will  it  be  said  that  matter  and  energy  are  eternal 
and  that  in  them  we  find  the  First  Cause  ?  A  more  fu- 
tile claim  could  not  be  made.  Neither  matter  nor  energy 
exhibits  any  of  the  attributes  of  a  First  Cause.  The 
molecules  or  atoms  of  matter,  infinitely  numerous  in  the 
universe,  are  distributed  into  between  sixty  and  seventy 
different  classes,  in  which  absolute  uniformity  of  size  and 
vibratory  motion  prevails — a  uniformity  which,  as  Sir 
John  Herschel  and  Clerk  Maxwell  have  shown,  proves 
them  to  possess  "  the  essential  character  of  a  manufactured 
article."  The  latest  theory  of  the  constitution  of  matter. 
Sir  William  Thomson's  theory  of  "  vortex  atoms  "  in  an 
absolutely  homogeneous  and  frictionless  fluid,  requires  a 
Power  above  that  of  matter  or  energy  for  the  creation  of 
the  original  atoms.  Even  farther  is  energy  from  mani- 
festing the  attributes  of  a  First  Cause.  The  principle  of 
the  conservation  of  energy  shows  that  the  amount  of 
energy  in  the  universe  is  limited.  The  law  of  the  dissi- 
pation of  energy  proves  that  the  energy  available  for 
work  is  slowly  being  frittered  away  in  the  form  of  heat. 
The  same  mechanical  principles  which  make  a  perpetual- 
motion  machine  impossible  show  beyond  a  perad venture 
that  the  energy  of  the  universe  will,  unless  now  unknown 
causes  should  begin  to  operate,  come  to  a  standstill.     But 


12  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

what  has  an  end  must  have  had  a  beginning.  Thus  we 
are  brought  back  to  tlie  necessity  of  a  First  Cause,  or 
what  Aristotle  called  a  Primum  Movens,  a  Power  which 
initiated  the  motions  of  the  universe. 

(6)  Finally,  we  have  the  ontological  argument,  de- 
rided by  all  superficial  thinkers,  but  profoundly  signifi- 
cant to  every  truly  philosophical  mind.  God  reveals  Him- 
self in  the  necessary  idea  of  the  Absolute  or  Infinite. 
When  we  look  at  the  finite  things  about  us,  things  that 
have  had  a  beginning  and  will  have  an  end,  things  that 
change  and  decay,  things  that  exist  only  as  they  depend 
upon  other  things,  things  that  are  imperfect,  inevitably 
there  arises  in  the  mind  the  idea  of  some  Being  or  some- 
thing that  has  eternally  existed,  that  is  unchangeable, 
that  is  self-existent  and  independent.  This  idea  asserts 
itself  with  necessary  force.  We  cannot  think  without  it. 
It  is  a  "  necessary  datum  of  consciousness."  Men  cannot 
rid  their  consciousness  of  it.  They  may  deny  its  exist- 
ence, but  it  is  there  all  the  same.  They  may  call  it  by 
some  other  name,  but  it  shows  the  same  attributes. 
They  may  claim  to  prove  the  divine  existence  without 
this  proof,  but  they  always  smuggle  it  in  somewhere  in 
the  course  of  their  argument.  For  the  idea  of  the  Abso- 
lute is  there.  As  the  Wise  Man  has  said  (Eccles.  iii.  11, 
E..  Y.,  margin),  God  has  set  eternity  in  our  heart.  Now 
we  argue  that  a  necessary  idea  is  true.  The  idea  of  the 
Absolute  proves  the  existence  of  the  Absolute.  If  we 
distrust  our  necessary  ideas  we  fall  into  universal  scepti- 
cism. We  do  not  claim  that  this  argument,  any  more 
than  the  others  taken  singly,  proves  the  full  theistic  con- 
ception of  God,  but  we  claim  that  it  does  prove  the  exist- 
ence of  an  Absolute  Being.  And  we  cannot  doubt  that 
this  idea  is  itself  a  token  of  the  presence  of  the  Deity 
Himself  in  our  souls. 

II.  We  have  left,  in  the  second  place,  the  task  of  gath- 
ering together  the  knowledge  furnished  us  by  the  natural 


THE  NATURAL  REVELATION  OF  GOD       13 

revelation  of  God.  By  the  same  investigations  which 
prove  that  God  is,  we  learn  toliat  He  is.  The  knowl- 
edge of  His  existence  and  His  nature  are  inseparable. 
Herbert  Spencer,  indeed,  declares  ("  First  Principles," 
p.  46,  Am.  ed.)  that  it  is  the  "  deepest,  widest,  and  most 
certain  of  all  facts,  that  the  Power  which  the  Universe 
manifests  to  ns  is  utterly  inscrutable."  But  the  agnostic 
is  not  even  consistent  with  himself,  for  he  declares  that  his 
Unknown  not  only  exists  but  is  a  Power  or  a  Cause.  The 
truth  is  that  we  cannot  know  that  God  is  without  at  the 
same  time  knowing  much  of  what  He  is.  Herbert  Spen- 
cer arbitrarily  admits  the  validity  of  our  two  last  argu- 
ments and  repudiates  all  the  rest.  But  it  is  a  matter  for 
rejoicing  that  the  prevalent  philosophy  of  our  time  is 
not  atheistic.  The  Christian  tlieist  says  to  the  agnostic 
with  his  Unknown  God,  what  Paul  said  to  the  Athenians, 
"  Whom  therefore  ye  ignorantly  worship,  him  declare  we 
unto  you."     (See  H.  B.  Smith's  "  Apologetics,"  p.  45.) 

Let  us  now  look  more  closely  at  the  knowledge  of  God's 
nature  which  has  come  to  us  along  the  line  of  the  proof 
for  the  divine  existence.  We  reverse  the  order  in  which 
the  proofs  were  presented.  First,  we  have  what  may  be 
called  the  ontological  attributes  of  God.  He  is  the  Abso- 
lute or  Infinite,  self-existent,  independent  of  all  other 
beings,  capable  of  existing  out  of  relation  to  all  things, 
although  we  know  Him  only  in  His  relations  to  the  things 
which  He  has  made.  He  is  One,  for  if  there  were  two 
or  more  absolutes,  none  would  be  absolute.  He  is  the 
Eternal,  who  was  and  is  and  is  to  come,  the  one  Being  su- 
perior to  all  limitations  of  time.  He  is  the  Unchanging 
One,  the  same  yesterday,  to-day,  and  forever.  He  is 
superior  to  all  limitations  of  space,  yet  omnipresent  and 
everywhere  active  in  space. 

Next,  we  have  revealed  to  us  what  we  may  designate 
the  cosmological  attributes  oi  God.  God  is  the  self-caused 
Being.     The  question  is  often  asked,  after  we  have  been 


14  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

inquiring  for  the  cause  of  the  universe,  "What  is  the 
cause  of  God  ?  "  It  is  not  a  foolish  question.  "We  not 
only  have  a  right  to  ask  it  but  ought  to  ask  it.  The  law 
of  causality  has  its  rights  even  in  the  presence  of  God, 
who  gave  it  to  us.  But  the  answer  to  the  question  does 
not  carry  us  outside  of  God.  He  is  His  own  cause.  He 
is  at  once  cause  and  effect.  The  old  Nicene  Fathers 
availed  themselves  of  this  fact — though  most  theologians 
would  to-day  hesitate  to  follow  them  in  their  use  of  it — 
in  their  explanation  of  the  inner  relations  of  the  Trinit}', 
And  then  God  is  omnipotent.  His  power  is  without 
limit.  He  has  made  all  things.  He  is  the  ground  of  all 
things.  He  preserves  them  in  existence.  He  governs 
them  in  His  providence.  I  said  that  God's  power  is  un- 
limited. Let  me  guard  the  statement  against  misunder- 
standing. I  do  not  mean  that  it  is  not  limited  by  His  own 
nature  and  will.  God  is  not  mere  power.  His  power  is 
limited  by  His  wisdom  and  justice  and  love.  Moreover, 
there  are  certain  limits  of  His  own  making  in  the  creature. 
There  is  a  true  sense  in  which  the  material  creation  limits 
God.  There  is  a  still  more  significant  sense  in  which 
human  freedom  limits  the  divine  power.  But  these  limi- 
tations God  has  Himself  constituted.  He  could  at  any 
time,  if  He  wished,  remove  them.  Along  the  line  of  the 
revelation  which  gives  its  force  to  the  cosmological  argu- 
ment we  are  brought  close  to  the  personality  of  God. 
The  whole  weight  of  our  reasoning  respecting  the  First 
Cause  goes  to  show  that  it  is  a  Will.  It  is  will  alone 
which  explains  the  power  which  the  universe  manifests. 
Yet  the  cosmological  reasoning  rather  suggests  than  proves 
this.     We  must  look  further. 

God's  revelation  of  Himself  in  the  rationalit}^  of  nature 
and  in  the  human  soul,  as  we  have  investigated  it  in  con- 
nection with  the  teleological  and  psj^chological  arguments, 
first  allows  the  personality  of  God  to  dawn  in  full-orbed 
splendor  upon  us.     A  person  is  a  self-conscious  and  self- 


THE  NATUKAL  REVELATION  OF  GOD       15 

determining  being.  The  great  truth  wliich  Christian  the- 
ism lays  its  first,  and  in  some  respects  its  chiefest,  emphasis 
upon  is  the  personality  of  God.  Among  the  personal  at- 
tributes we  give  the  foremost  place  to  God's  spirituality. 
He  is  not  material.  His  essence  is  like  our  higher  essence. 
Then  He  is  a  Being  of  infinite  knowledge,  who  does  not 
reach  knowledge  and  truth  by  slow  processes  like  us,  but 
has  all  knowledge  and  all  truth  from  the  first,  yea,  is  the 
Source  of  all  knowledge  and  all  truth.  All  possible  things 
and  all  actual  things  are  present  to  His  thought.  Next, 
He  is  possessed  of  infinite  Nvisdom,  conceiving  the  highest 
ends  and  reaching  them  by  the  best  means.  Once  more, 
God  is  free.  The  power  of  choice  wliich  is  the  deepest 
element  in  our  manhood  is  an  attribute  of  God,  who  is 
none  the  less  free  because  He  always  uses  this  power 
aright.  In  Him  freedom  and  necessity  meet  in  that  highest 
form  of  freedom,  what  the  philosophers  call  "  real  free- 
dom," which  is  a  moral,  though  not  a  natural  necessity. 
Again,  God,  like  us,  is  possessed  of  feeling.  All  that 
is  purest  and  best  in  human  sensibility  is  found  in  God. 
And,  as  has  been  already  remarked,  God  is  the  highest 
Beauty,  as  He  is  the  source  of  all  finite  beauty. 

God's  revelation  in  conscience  and  the  moral  order  of 
the  world  gives  us  the  knowledge  of  His  moral  attributes. 
He  is  the  Holy  One,  the  Being  utterly  opposed  in  His 
nature  to  all  evil,  who  gathers  into  one  all  possible  moral 
perfections.  He  is  the  Truth.  The  uniformity  of  nat- 
ural law  is  a  manifestation  of  God's  truth  in  the  sphere  of 
nature.  It  finds  its  fullest  manifestation  in  his  utter- 
ances to  men.  God  is  the  Righteous  One.  To  every  be- 
ing He  gives  his  due,  the  suum  cuique,  with  absolute  im- 
partiality. His  righteousness  is  manifest  in  the  main- 
tenance of  His  own  rights,  in  rewards  and  punishments 
and  grace  among  other  rational  beings.  God  is  the  Good 
One.  He  sets  before  Him  as  His  end  in  dealing  with  His 
creatures  their  highest  well-being  and  happiness. 


16  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

God's  revelation  in  religious  experience  furnishes  us 
with  the  highest  attribute  of  all,  which  we  may  call  the 
religious  attribute,  namely,  the  divine  Love,  God  is  Love. 
It  is  His  nature  to  give.  He  finds  His  highest  good  in 
the  good  of  others.  He  is  greatest  when  He  stoops  low- 
est.    He  is  happiest  when  He  serves. 

The  question  will  be  raised,  Is  it  true  that  all  men  pos- 
sess such  a  knowledge  of  God  as  has  just  been  delineated  ? 
Do  not  facts  point  to  a  very  different  conception  of  God 
among  the  great  majority  of  men  ?  The  only  honest  an- 
swer will  be  the  affirmative.  All  the  forms  of  the  divine 
revelation  are  open  to  every  man.  All  the  arguments 
which  have  been  enumerated  are  within  the  reach  of 
every  man.  But  all  men  do  not  pnt  the  true  interpreta- 
tion upon  the  divine  revelation.  All  men  see  the  same 
sun,  but  it  does  not  look  alike  to  all.  The  botanist  and 
the  child  look  upon  the  same  flower,  but  the  botanist  sees 
what  the  child  cannot  see.  God's  natural  revelation  is 
made  to  a  sinful  race,  and  there  are  influences  at  work  in 
men  which  tend  to  obscure  the  revelation  to  a  greater  or 
less  extent.  Hence  the  almost  infinite  diversity  in  the  re- 
ligious beliefs  of  men.  Each  man  has  a  spiritual  defect  of 
vision,  which  distorts  his  apprehension  of  God,  a  kind  of 
spiritual  astigmatism,  of  which  he  may  be  wholly  unaware. 
And  then  society  and  even  physical  nature  have  been  so 
corrupted  by  sin  that  the  revelation  comes  to  the  individ- 
ual to  a  considerable  extent  through  a  disturbing  medium. 
So  it  happens  that  few  men,  in  their  natural  state,  attain 
a  true  knowledge  of  God  as  He  reveals  Himself  in  nat- 
ural ways.  Especially  is  this  the  case  with  respect  to  the 
moral  and  religious  revelation  of  God. 

Such  a  description  of  the  divine  nature  as  has  here  been 
given  is  nnknown  among  the  heathen.  Once  only  has  it 
been  approximately  reached.  In  the  days  of  decaying  re- 
ligion in  Greece  and  Rome  philosophy  came  like  a  fresh 
west  wind  to  blow  away  the  clouds  of  lieathen  mytholo- 


m 


THE  NATURAL  KEVELATION  OF  GOD       17 

gies  and  modes  of  thought,  and  the  sun  of  theism  shone 
forth  for  a  little  with  almost  unobscured  radiance.  But 
that  was  an  exception — one  of  those  exceptions  that  prove 
the  rule.  The  natural  revelation,  as  we  have  seen  it,  is 
that  revelation  seen  by  the  aid  of  Christianity.  To  us  the 
absurdities  and  immoralities  of  heathenism  seem  strange 
in  view  of  God's  universal  revelation,  and  doubtless  the 
heathen  are,  as  Paul  says,  without  excuse  when  they  turn 
from  the  light  they  have  to  ways  of  life  which  their  own 
consciences  declare  to  be  sinful.  But  we  must  remember 
that  we  approach  the  investigation  of  the  natural  revela- 
tion with  all  the  light  which  God's  gracious  revelation  in 
Christ  has  to  throw  upon  the  subject.  Even  though  we 
may  not  have  experienced  the  grace  of  Christ's  salvation 
in  our  hearts,  the  clarifying  and  helpful  influences  of 
Christianity  are  all  about  us. 

We  are  now  prepared  to  state  our  knowledge  of  God,  as 
it  comes  to  us  through  the  natural  revelation,  in  few  and 
simple  words.  What  better  can  be  chosen  than  those  of 
the  good  old  "  Shorter  Catechism,"  which  we  older  people 
learned  at  our  mother's  knees,  but  which  our  children  here 
in  New  England  know  but  little  of,  while  to  their  great 
loss  we  put  nothing  in  its  place :  "  God  is  a  Spirit,  infi- 
nite, eternal,  and  unchangeable,  in  His  being,  wisdom, 
power,  holiness,  justice,  goodness,  and  truth."  Wise  and 
happy  is  he  who  believes  these  words  with  all  his  heart 
and  lives  up  to  his  belief, 
2 


n. 

THE  REDEMPTIVE  REVELATION 

Christian  Theolog}^  takes  for  granted  the  reality  and 
the  truth  of  the  universal  revelation  of  God.  It  finds  a 
place  in  its  system  for  all  the  doctrines  of  Natural  Theol- 
ogy— such  as  the  divine  existence,  God's  attributes,  His 
providence,  and  the  like — gladly  welcoming  and  appro- 
priating all  the  light  that  comes  to  it  from  this  source.  It 
is  not,  however,  chiefly  concerned  with  the  general  revela- 
tion. The  distinctive  truths  of  the  Christian  faith  are  de- 
rived from  a  higher  revelation — a  revelation  which,  though 
destined  for  all  men,  was  at  first  given  to  only  a  part  of 
the  human  race  and  is  even  now  unknown  to  the  majoritj^ 
of  men.  This  is  sometimes  called  the  special  revelation 
to  distinguish  it  from  the  universal,  or  the  supernatural  in 
contradistinction  from  the  natural.  But  we  best  express 
its  distinctive  characteristics  when  we  call  it  the  redonj)- 
tive  revelation. 

It  is  to  this  redemptive  revelation  that  I  wish  to  call 
your  attention  at  the  present  time.  I  shall  endeavor  to 
show  why  it  has  been  given,  in  what  it  consists,  M'hat 
methods  God  has  followed  in  making  it,  through  what 
stages  it  has  run  in  reaching  its  culmination  in  Clirist. 
The  proof  that  it  is  what  it  claims  to  be  will  be  given  on 
another  occasion. 

I.  The  purpose  of  this  revelation,  as  the  epithet  redeinj)- 
tive  implies,.is  redemption,  or,  as  it  might  Avith  equal  truth 
be  stated,  the  establishment  of  God's  kingdom  in  a  world 
of  sin. 


THE   REDEMPTIVE    REVELATION  19 

The  necessity  of  such  a  revelation  lies  in  the  fact  of 
sin.  In  a  world  of  holy  beings  the  natural  revelation 
would  suffice  for  all  spiritual  and  temporal  needs.  There 
would  be  an  unobscured  vision  of  God  and  undisturbed 
communion  with  Him.  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  there 
would  be  no  need  in  such  a  world  of  higher  and  fuller 
manifestations  of  God,  as  the  spiritual  receptivity  of  its 
inhabitants  was  matured  and  enlarged.  I  do  not  deny  the 
possibility  that  if  our  race  had  remained  sinless,  the 
divine  Son  would  have  become  incarnate  for  the  perfect- 
ing of  the  race — though  I  confess  my  utter  inability  to 
do  more  than  speculate  upon  the  subject.  But  there 
seems  to  me  every  reason  to  believe  that  in  that  case  the 
higher  revelations  would  come  simply  and  normally  in  the 
line  of  the  natural  revelation.  They  would  be  a  part  of 
it.  It  would  be  as  it  is  in  the  case  of  the  child  and  the 
parent.  From  the  first  the  child  stands  in  full  commu- 
nion with  its  father  and  mother.  But  the  parental  love  is 
revealed  in  ever  new  and  higher  manifestations  as  fast  as 
the  child's  soul  is  opened  to  receive  them.  There  is  simply 
an  enlargement  and  development  of  the  original  relation. 

But  alas,  we  do  not  live  in  a  holy  world.  It  is  a  sinful 
world.  Every  man  becomes  a  sinner  so  soon  as  he  be- 
comes a  responsible  actor  in  the  world.  That  great  law  of 
the  spiritual  universe  which  Christ  has  expressed  in  the 
words,  "  Blessed  are  the  pure  in  heart,  for  they  shall  see 
God,"  operates  in  its  negative  form  in  every  sinner.  Be- 
cause they  are  impure  and  sinful  they  do  not  see  God  as 
lie  is.  He  reveals  Himself  to  them,  but  they  do  not  re- 
ceive the  revelation,  or  they  put  a  false  interpretation 
upon  it.  The  spiritual  eye,  instead  of  being  single,  is  evil, 
and  the  whole  soul  is  full  of  darkness.  And  this  dark- 
ness is  increased  by  the  fact  that  not  only  is  the  soul  shut 
off  from  a  true  knowledge  of  God  by  its  own  sin,  but  so- 
ciety is  permeated  with  sin  and  the  effects  of  sin.  'No 
man  can  form  his  beliefs  and  opinions  in  entire  indepen- 


20  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

dence  of  his  fellow-men.  He  is  inevitably  influenced  by 
the  beliefs  and  opinions  of  those  about  him,  as  well  as  by 
the  prevalent  modes  of  thought,  customs,  notions  of  the 
societj'  in  which  he  lives.  Now  in  a  sinful  world  the  sin- 
ful social  environment  tends  to  obscure  the  knowledge  of 
God.  Herein  lies  the  great  power  of  corrupt  religions 
over  their  votaries.  And  then,  once  more,  even  jiature  is 
no  longer  the  pure  medium  of  the  divine  revelation.  The 
effects  of  sin  are  manifest  in  the  natural  world  itself.  The 
human  body  begins  its  career  with  an  inherited  natuie 
that  is  physically  depraved  and  that  is,  like  the  soul  in  its 
inherited  tendencies  to  sin,  the  occasion  of  sin.  The  con- 
sequences of  sin  are  manifest  in  various  disturbances  of 
material  nature.  The  original  nature  as  it  came  from  the 
hands  of  God  no  longer  exists.  The  creation  has  been 
made  subject  to  vanity  (Rom.  viii.  20).  For  all  these  i-ea- 
sons  the  natural  revelation  is  not  sufficient.  It  furnishes 
sinful  men  with  neither  the  knowledge  nor  the  help  which 
they  so  sadly  lack.  The  view  it  gives  of  God  is  imperfect 
and  distorted.  It  discloses  no  relief  from  the  guilt  and 
power  of  sin.  The  need  of  the  world  lost  in  sin  is  for  re- 
demption. 

It  is  the  object  of  the  redemptive  revelation  to  supplj^ 
this  need.  God  makes  Himself  known  in  new  aspects 
and  new  ways,  that  thus  He  may  deliver  the  sinful  race 
from  all  the  evils  into  which  it  has  fallen.  Redemption 
is  a  term  of  very  wide  import,  both  negatively  and  posi- 
tively. It  means  not  only  the  salvation  of  men  from  the 
guilt  of  sin,  but  the  carrying  of  them  forward  to  that  per- 
fect and  sinless  manhood  for  which  they  were  created. 
It  means  not  only  the  rescue  of  individuals  from  an  evil 
world,  but  the  deliverance  of  the  race  itself  and  its  attain- 
ment of  the  divine  ideal — so  that  whatever  may  be  the 
case  with  individuals,  the  race  as  a  whole  shall  be  saved. 
It  implies  the  renovation  of  all  the  institutions  of  society 
and  all  the  activities  of  mankind.     It  will  not  be  com- 


THE   REDEMPTIVE   KEVELATION  21 

pleted  until  the  natural  woild  is  redeemed,  "  the  creation 
itself  also  delivered  from  the  bondage  of  corruption " 
(Horn.  viii.  21),  including  the  redemption  of  the  body  in 
the  resurrection  and  the  restoration  of  material  nature  to 
its  true  condition — or  more  than  that,  its  participation  in 
"  the  glorious  liberty  of  the  children  of  God."  The  same 
great  pui-pose  is  expressed  by  the  conception  of  the  king- 
dom of  God.  In  the  sinful  world  God's  rightful  dominion 
has  been  subverted.  He  rules  by  His  power  but  not  by 
the  free  consent  of  His  subjects.  Redemption  is  the  re- 
establishment  of  His  sway.  As  fast  as  it  advances  God's 
kingdom  comes  and  His  will  is  done  in  this  world  of  sin. 

The  redemptive  revelation  is  a  means  to  redemption  or 
the  establishment  of  God's  kingdom  as  an  end.  This  is 
its  purpose,  its  final  cause.  In  all  its  manifestations  it  is 
subordinate  to  this  object.  This  determines  its  form  and 
manner,  as  well  as  its  contents.  This  explains  the  fact 
that  it  is  chiefly  concerned  with  the  moral  and  religious 
attributes  of  God,  and  only  incidentally  with  the  meta- 
physical, physical,  and  intellectual  atti'ibutes  so  fully 
brought  to  light  by  the  natural  revelation. 

One  point  deserves  a  moment's  notice  before  we  leave 
this  branch  of  our  subject.  The  view  just  taken  of  the 
redemptive  revelation  may  seem  to  imply  that  this  revela- 
tion is  an  afterthought  of  God,  consequent  upon  human 
sin,  while  the  natural  revelation  expresses  the  original 
divine  intention.  There  is  indeed  an  element  of  truth 
here,  in  so  far  as  sin  comes  in  conflict  with  the  divine 
ideal,  which  we  must  regard  as  at  least  logically  first  in 
the  eternal  thought  of  God.  This  conception  of  the  re- 
demptive revelation,  however,  does  not  give  us  the  whole 
truth.  In  God's  eternal  plan,  sin  was  foreseen  and  pro- 
vided for.  God  knew  that  the  world  He  created  was  to 
be  a  sinful  world.  And  so  while  undisturbed  holiness 
might  be  the  ideal,  sin  and  redemption  were  the  deter- 
mining elements  in  the  divine  purpose.     The  redemptive 


22  PEESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

revelation  was  no  more  an  afterthought  than  the  natural 
revelation.  God  meant  that  the  two  should  work  side  by 
side,  both  performing  their  parts  in  carrying  out  His 
great  work  of  salvation. 

II.  We  pass  now  to  consider  the  contents  of  the  re- 
demptive revelation.  And  liere,  as  in  dealing  with  the 
natural  revelation,  we  must  be  on  our  guard  against  the 
notion  that  revelation  consists  only  or  chiefly  in  doctrinal 
instruction.  This  notion,  which  has  been  widespread  and 
inveterate,  has  wrought  great  confusion  in  Christian 
thought,  and  it  has  been  one  of  the  most  meritorious 
services  of  modern  theology  that  it  has  succeeded  to  so 
great  an  extent  in  supplanting  it  by  a  larger  and  truer 
conception  of  the  redemptive  I'evelation.  That  revelation, 
like  all  revelation,  is  a  self-manifestation  of  God,  an  un- 
veiling of  Himself,  a  disclosure  of  His  being  and  His 
ways.  It  gives  us  not  merely  a  knowledge  about  God  but 
a  knowledge  of  God.  The  doctrinal  instruction  which  it 
contains,  and  I  would  not  deny  that  this  constitutes  one  of 
its  important  elements,  has  for  its  object  to  bring  men 
directly  to  God  Himself,  that  they  may  see  Him  as  He  is. 

There  is  another  misconception,  closely  related  to  that 
just  mentioned,  which  we  shall  also  do  well  to  avoid. 
This  is  the  identification  of  the  redemptive  revelation  and 
the  Holy  Scriptures.  Undoubtedly  the  Bible  is  a  constit- 
uent element  of  the  revelation.  It  is  one  of  the  most  im- 
portant, in  some  respects  the  most  important,  channels 
through  which  the  revelation  of  grace  comes  to  us.  AYe 
may  even  in  a  true  sense  call  it  itself  a  revelation  of  God. 
But,  strictly  speaking,  the  Bible  is  not  the  revelation  but 
the  record  of  that  revelation.  There  was  a  revelation 
before  there  was  any  Bible.  It  might  now  exist  even  if 
there  were  no  Bible.  The  Bible  is  a  means  and  not  an 
end.  The  end  of  revelation  is  the  manifestation  of  God 
Himself.  The  Bible  is  a  blessed  book  to  those  who  find 
God  in  it  and  through  it.     But,  so  far  as  we  are  concerned. 


THE  REDEMPTIVE   EEVELATION  23 

it  is  no  better  than  any  other  book  unless  we  find  God  by 
its  means. 

The  redemptive  revelation,  then,  is  the  manifestation  of 
God  as  the  Redeemer,  as  the  God  of  grace.  As  its  object 
is  redemption,  so  it  makes  known  to  men  what  they  need 
to  know  for  their  redemption.  Its  contents  may  be 
viewed  under  two  aspects — as  a  revelation  of  God's  nature 
and  character,  and  as  a  revelation  of  His  redemptive 
work.     Let  us  consider  each  of  these  aspects. 

The  redemptive  revelation  is  intended  to  give  men  a 
new  view  of  God's  nature  and  character.  It  takes  us  to 
the  highest  point  in  the  knowledge  of  God  and  reveals 
Him  as  the  perfect  Love.  Of  this  supreme  divine  attri- 
bute the  natural  revelation  gives  some  vague  hints  but  no 
certain  knowledge.  At  most  it  suggests  a  mild  and  com- 
placent benevolence  which  is  often  obscured,  and  at  times 
seems  to  be  completely  obliterated,  by  His  sterner  attri- 
butes as  they  are  manifested  in  the  darker  aspects  of  nat- 
ure. It  is  only  when  God  Himself  comes  to  meet  us  in 
the  redemptive  revelation  that  we  begin  to  grasp  that 
depth  of  meaning  which  is  expressed  by  the  Christian 
word  "  love."  When  He  manifests  Himself  as  the  Sa- 
viour, we  first  understand  that  He  is  a  Being  to  whom  it 
is  more  blessed  to  give  than  to  receive,  that  it  is  His  joy 
to  impart  Himself  to  others,  that  He  finds  His  greatness 
in^condescension  and  self-denial.  His  highest  good  in  seek- 
ing the  good  of  His  creatures,  that  He  is  merciful  and 
compassionate,  ready  to  pardon  and  to  save  even  the  chief 
of  sinners.  A  new  light  dawns  upon  the  soul  when  God 
teaches  it  the  meaning  of  those  wonderful  words,  "  God 
so  loved  the  world  that  he  gave  his  only-begotten  Son, 
that  whosoever  believeth  on  him  should  not  perish  but 
have  everlasting  life."  A  part  of  this  revelation  of  God's 
love  is  His  manifestation  of  Himself  in  His  personal  rela- 
tion to  men  as  the  Father,  the  universal  Father  who  seeks 
and  would  save  every  erring  child,  and  in  a  still  higher 


24  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

seuse  tlie  Father  of  those  who  give  tliemselves  to  Iliiii. 
Another  element  in  the  revelation  of  love,  still  more  ten- 
der, is  the  manifestation  of  God  as  Son,  the  divine  Word 
who  stoops  to  earth,  becomes  incarnate,  dies  for  our  re- 
demption, raises  our  manhood  in  His  own  person  to  the 
throne  of  God.  And  still  another  element  is  the  revela- 
tion of  God  as  the  Spirit,  the  indwelling  God,  the  spiritual 
life  of  man,  who  holds  the  soul  in  union  with  the  Father 
and  the  Christ,  thus  giving  to  the  redemptive  revelation 
its  most  profound  and  sacred  meaning.  Nor  should  we 
forget  that  accompanying  the  revelation  of  God's  love 
there  is  a  higher  manifestation  of  His  holiness,  of  the 
utter  separation  of  God  from  all  sin  and  evil,  and  of  His 
awful  purity,  in  the  light  of  which  we  discover  the  true 
extent  and  depth  of  the  guilt  of  sin.  And  out  of  this 
revelation  of  God's  holiness  flows  a  profounder  disclosure 
of  His  righteousness,  as  a  power  both  of  salvation  and  of 
judgment. 

And  then,  the  redemptive  revelation  is  a  manifestation 
of  God's  work  of  grace.  It  discovers  to  us  that  great  sys- 
tem of  redemptive  agencies  which  God  has  established  for 
the  salvation  of  mankind.  God  is  seen  from  the  first 
active  for  the  recovery  of  His  lost  world.  Behind  the 
scenes  and  coming  only  now  and  then  into  sight  there  is 
a  vast  redemptive  machinery.  God  Himself,  the  lioly 
angels,  good  men,  institutions  divinely  established  and 
guided,  all  work  together  to  save  the  sinner  and  build  up 
the  saint.  God's  providence  is  enlisted  in  the  blessed  en- 
terprise. The  incarnation  of  the  divine  Son,  his  liuman 
ministrj^,  and  the  atoning  death  upon  the  cross,  by  which 
provision  is  made  for  the  pardon  of  sin,  reveal  to  us  some 
of  the  most  important  aspects  of  this  system  of  redemp- 
tive agencies.  The  work  of  the  risen  Christ,  the  King  of 
the  divine  kingdom,  seated  at  the  right  hand  of  the  maj- 
esty on  high,  and  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  whom  he 
sends,  make  known  still  other  aspects.     The  way  of  salva- 


THE   REDEMPTIVE   REVELATION  25 

tion  is  disclosed  to  the  sinner,  justification  by  faith  in 
iTesus  Christ.  Regeneration,  the  new  life,  and  all  the 
other  saving  facts  and  truths  of  the  Christian  system  form 
a  part  of  this  wonderful  revelation  of  the  divine  grace, 
this  manifestation  of  the  redemptive  power  of  God.  To 
it  also  belong  the  discovery  of  the  heaven  of  the  blessed, 
the  assurance  of  the  triumph  of  redemption  on  earth, 
the  second  coming  of  the  Redeemer,  the  resurrection,  the 
judgment,  the  doom  of  the  wicked,  the  perfecting  of  the 
race  in  the  eternal  blessedness,  the  new  heavens  and 
the  new  earth, 

III.  Such,  briefly  stated,  are  the  contents  of  the  re- 
demptive revelation.  We  inquire  now  as  to  its  method. 
It  is  easy  to  see  that  God,  in  making  such  a  revelation, 
must  proceed  in  a  very  different  way  from  that  which  He 
follows  in  the  natural  revelation.  The  knowledge  of  God 
and  His  work  of  grace,  which  has  just  been  outlined,  can- 
not, from  the  nature  of  the  case,  be  given  to  a  sinful  race 
all  at  once  and  in  all  its  fulness.  Revelation  implies  not 
only  a  revealer  but  a  mind  to  receive  the  revelation. 
There  must  be  a  receptivity  on  the  part  of  those  to  whom 
the  revelation  comes.  And  the  psychological  obstacle, 
which  the  lack  of  such  receptivity  presents,  cannot  be 
removed  by  a  mere  exercise  of  power.  In  making  the 
liuman  soul  what  it  is,  God  has  set  limits  to  His  own  oper- 
ations. A  new  idea  cannot  be  inserted  into  a  mind  as  a 
nail  is  driven  into  a  board.  It  is  doubtful  whether  even  a 
miracle  would  make  a  two-years-old  child  understand  the 
solution  of  a  problem  in  the  differential  calculus.  Now, 
what  would  be  psychologically  impossible  in  the  case  of  a 
child,  because  contrary  to  the  laws  of  human  development, 
would  be  still  more  impossible  in  the  case  of  a  race  not 
only  in  its  moral  childhood  but  sunk  in  sin.  Before  the 
revelation  can  be  made  the  receptivity  for  it  must  be  cre- 
ated. God,  even  with  the  help  of  the  supernatural  means 
which  He  employs,  must  begin  at  the  bottom  and  work  up. 


26  PRESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

The  revelation  could  be  made  no  faster  tlian  it  could  be 
received.  And  when  once  received,  it  must  be  made  so 
to  operate  upon  the  already  awakened  receptivity  as  to 
stimulate  it,  and  enlarge  it,  and  prepare  it  for  still  further 
revelation. 

Let  us  look  at  some  of  the  more  important  elements  in 
the  Divine  method. 

1.  The  relation  of  the  supernatural  to  the  natural. 
We  call  the  redemptive  revelation  supernatural  for  two 
reasons :  First,  because  its  purpose — namely,  redemption 
— is  not  provided  for  in  the  natural  revelation ;  and 
secondly,  because  some  of  the  chief  agencies  employed  do 
not  belong  to  the  system  of  natural  forces  as  manifested 
in  the  ordinary  operations  of  the  physical  and  spiritual 
worlds.  It  is  in  this  latter  sense  that  we  ordinarily  call 
the  revelation  supernatural.  Among  these  supernatural 
means  are  those  operations  of  God  in  external  nature  to 
which  we  give  the  name  of  miracles,  and  that  divine  influ- 
ence upon  the  human  soul  which  we  call  inspiration,  and 
those  interferences  of  God  in  the  affairs  of  men  and 
nations  which  —  though  we  cannot  call  them,  strictly 
speaking,  miracles — go  bej'ond  the  laws  of  His  ordinary 
providence.  This  supernatural  or  miraculous  working  of 
God  is  what  gives  its  distinctive  character  to  the  redemp- 
tive revelation.  Remove  it  and  reduce  all  to  the  level  of 
the  natural,  and  the  revelation  ceases  to  be  redemptive 
and  Christianity  becomes  a  mere  "  republication  of  the 
religion  of  nature."  It  was  by  these  supernatural  agen- 
cies that  God  was  able  to  reach  a  race  so  far  fallen  that 
they  could  not  be  found  and  raised  by  natural  m.eans. 
It  was  by  them  that  God,  so  to  speak,  secured  a  fulcrum 
for  Ilis  lever  and  was  able  to  do  Ilis  redemptive  work. 

But  although  these  agencies  were  indispensable,  God 
used  them  with  a  wise  economy.  Wherever  it  was  pos- 
sible He  employed  natural  means.  If  we  take  the  revela- 
tion as  a  whole,  in  all  its  long  history,  although  the  su- 


THE   KEDEMPTIVE   REVELATION  27 

pernatnral  is  everywhere  present  in  it,  yet  the  natural  forms 
a  much  larger  element.  God's  method  was  to  graft  the 
supernatural  upon  the  natural,  and  when  it  became  incor- 
porated into  the  natural  to  subject  it  to  the  laws  of  the 
latter.  Accordingly,  there  was  no  conflict  between  the 
two,  except  in  so  far  as  the  natural  order  had  become  cor- 
rupted by  sin.  And  this  suggests  a  very  interesting  con- 
sideration. There  is  reason  to  believe  that  when  God 
made  use  of  the  supernatural.  He  always  had  disturbances 
in  the  order  of  nature  which  were  produced  by  human  sin. 
Where  nature  had  become  perverted,  the  supernatural 
came  in  as  a  healing  and  restorative  influence,  tending  to 
bring  nature  back  to  its  normal  condition,  or,  in  other 
words,  to  overcome  the  false  nature  and  re-establish  the 
true  nature.  And  in  so  far  as  nature  was  what  God  had 
made  it,  it  fell  in  with  the  new  influences  and  served  them. 
2.  The  redemptive  revelation  began  with  individuals. 
It  was  not  made  to  all  mankind,  as  is  the  case  with  the 
natural  revelation.  God  was  concerned  to  get  in  the  first 
place  a  foothold  for  the  redemption  which  Tie  was  to  be- 
stow upon  mankind.  It  was  not  so  important  that  many 
should  be  affected  superficially  as  that  a  few  should  be 
deeply  and  truly.  Then  they  could  be  the  bearers  of  the 
revelation  to  their  fellow-men.  Accordingly,  the  redemp- 
tive revelation  was  based  upon  election,  which  has  been 
tersely  and  beautifully  defined  by  a  modern  theologian  as 
"  a  method  by  which  God  uses  the  few  to  bless  the  many  " 
(Bruce,  "  Chief  End  of  Kevelation,"  p.  80).  We  are  so  wont 
to  associate  the  doctrine  of  election  with  certain  philo- 
sophical questions  which  have  grown  up  about  it,  that  we 
miss  the  simple  meaning  which  makes  the  conception  so 
important  in  the  Bible.  All  through  the  history  of  His 
kingdom  God's  method  of  reaching  the  race  has  been  the 
elective  method.  The  election  was  of  two  kinds,  individ- 
ual and  national.  The  individuals  chosen  were  men  of 
high  moral  and  spiritual  attainments,  whom  God  had  been 


28  PRESENT   DAY    THEOLOGY 

providentially  preparing  for  His  purpose.  They  were  men 
with  good  stuff  in  then),  men  of  spiritual  insight,  personal 
piety,  and,  above  all,  men  of  great  devotion  to  God,  ready 
and  willing  to  do  His  will.  How  much  their  own  free 
will  had  to  do  in  making  them  fit  instruments  for  God's 
work  we  may  not  be  able  to  say.  Doubtless  it  was  a 
most  important  element  in  the  problem.  But  we  must 
not  forget  that  election  has  roots  that  run  back  into  the 
eternal  plan  of  God,  and  that  He  had  the  largest  share  in 
making  them  what  they  were.  They  were  not  perfect 
men.  Often  they  had  great  faults,  and  sometimes  even 
great  moral  blemishes.  But  they  were  men  whom  God  in 
His  wisdom  chose  because  He  saw  that  He  could  use 
them.  Sometimes  their  very  faults,  overruled  by  God, 
were  made  to  advance  His  work.  And  then,  besides  the 
individuals  chosen,  God  selected  a  nation  to  be  the  bearer 
of  His  grace  to  men.  Israel  had  the  high  privilege  of  be- 
ing the  Chosen  People,  chosen  not  for  its  own  sake  alone 
but  to  bring  a  blessing  to  the  whole  human  race.  Final!}', 
election  culminates  in  Jesus  Christ,  God's  Chosen  One, 
divine  yet  human,  at  once  the  bearer  of  the  revelation  to 
mankind  and  himself  the  highest  revelation  of  God. 

3.  Again,  the  method  of  the  redemptive  revelation  was 
educational.  This  feature  has  been  clearly  recognized  by 
theologians  only  in  comparatively  recent  times.  To  a 
man  who  was  not  a  professed  theologian,  the  German  lit- 
terateur  Lessing,  belongs  the  credit  of  having  brought 
into  distinct  view  what  has  proved  one  of  the  most  fruit- 
ful conceptions  of  modei-n  theology,  a  conception  that  is 
undoubtedly  as  Biblical  as  it  is  truly  scientific.  The  prin- 
ciple which  Lessing  laid  down  in  his  famous  book  on  the 
Education  of  Mankind  ("  Die  Erziehung  des  Menschenge- 
schlechts")  is,  "What  education  is  to  the  individual,  reve- 
lation is  to  the  race."  Education  is  a  twofold  process ; 
on  the  one  side  there  is  a  preparing  of  the  soil  and  a  sow- 
ing of  seed,  on  the  other  a  culture  of  the  growing  plant. 


THE   llEDEMPTIVE   KEVELATION  29 

Thus  God  proceeded  in  His  redemptive  dealings  with  the 
race.  Individuals  and  nations  have  been  fitted  to  receive 
the  divine  trnth,  and  it  has  been  imparted  to  them,  as 
they  were  able  to  receive  it.  At  the  same  time  they  have 
been  prepared  and  enabled  to  impart  it  to  others,  to  pass 
on  the  torch  which  had  been  lighted  and  placed  in  their 
hands.  In  this  education  God  used  both  supernatural 
and  natural  means.  He  concentrated  upon  His  chosen  in- 
struments such  influences,  spiritual,  moral,  secular,  as 
were  adapted  to  bring  them  to  a  knowledge  of  Himself 
and  His  ways.  He  put  them  through  long  courses  of 
training.  He  thus  lifted  them  up  to  the  level  of  the  rev- 
elation He  had  to  make,  and  when  once  they  became  pos- 
sessed of  the  revelation,  the  revelation  itself  became  one 
of  the  educational  influences. 

Most  clearly  and  strikingly  is  this  method  illustrated  in 
the  case  of  the  great  men  of  Bible  times.  Such  names  as 
Abraham,  Moses,  Isaiah,  Peter,  John,  Paul  recall  to  our 
minds  processes  of  training  always  long,  generally  difiicult 
and  painful.  Even  the  Master  himself  was  a  pupil  in 
the  divine  school,  and  was  fitted  for  his  public  ministry 
only  after  thirt}^  years  of  discipline.  Then  consider  the 
education  of  Israel.  The  whole  Old  Testament  is  occupied 
with  it.  From  the  Chosen  People  in  the  wilderness  to 
the  Chosen  People  at  the  time  of  Christ  the  stride  is  im- 
mense. During  all  the  intervening  period  the  process 
was  steadily  advancing.  We  are  too  apt  in  thinking  of 
Israel  at  the  time  of  Christ  to  liave  regard  only  to  the  ele- 
ment in  the  nation  which  opposed  the  Saviour  and  denied 
his  Messiahship.  Pie  came  unto  his  own,  and  his  own 
received  him  not.  But  this  very  Israel  which  rejected 
the  Saviour  had  possession  of  the  divine  truth  by  which 
Jesus  was  prepared  for  his  work.  It  had  in  it  the  men 
and  women  who  were  ready  to  receive  his  Gospel.  The 
fulness  of  time  had  come.  Humanly  speaking,  the  in- 
carnation would  have  been  an  impossibility  until  Israel 


30  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

had  readied  this  stage  in  its  religions  development.  And 
the  reaching  of  this  stage  was  the  resnlt  of  God's  long 
schooling. 

Nor  shall  we  forget  the  education  of  the  heathen  na- 
tions, not  indeed  by  supernatural  means,  yet  not  for  that 
reason  the  less  real,  which  was  going  on,  during  all  the 
history  of  Israel  and  which  prepared  them  to  receive  the 
Gospel  when  God's  time  had  come. 

4.  Once  more,  as  the  thoughts  with  wliich  we  have  just 
been  engaged  have  prepared  us  to  realize,  God's  metiiod 
in  the  redemptive  revelation  is  progressive.  The  revelation 
came  in  the  form  of  a  sacred  history,  and  it  follows  the 
law  of  all  histor}^  progression  from  the  lower  to  the 
higher,  the  law  of  historical  evolution.  Some  of  the  most 
telling  analogies  and  illustrations  of  this  process  of  histori- 
cal growth  are  taken  from  the  realm  of  organic  life,  and 
it  is  interesting  to  observe  that  our  Saviour  himself  freely 
employed  them.  The  law  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  as  he 
expressed  it,  is,  '*'  First  the  blade,  then  the  ear,  after  that 
the  full  corn  in  the  ear"  (Mark  iv.  28).  But  the  prog- 
ress is  not  merely  that  of  ordinary  history.  There  is 
everywhere  that  mingling  of  the  supernatural  with  the 
natural  which  we  have  discovered  to  be  characteristic  of 
the  redemptive  revelation  in  all  its  parts.  There  is  a 
striking  analogy  between  this  process  and  that  which  has 
been  passed  through  in  the  evolution  of  the  forms  of  the 
natural  world.  Unless  we  take  the  view  of  the  extreme 
evolutionists,  who  place  evolution  in  the  place  of  God,  at 
certain  points  in  the  history  of  the  natural  world  God 
must  have  interposed  with  creative  acts.  But  in  every 
case  the  new  element,  as  soon  as  it  became  incorporated 
into  the  natural  order,  became  subject  to  the  laws  of  the 
natural  development.  The  new  fact  exists  first  merely  in 
the  germ  ;  it  develops  into  its  mature  form  by  a  natural 
process.  So  with  the  divine  revelation.  It  is  this  histor- 
ical character  of  revelation  which  gives  the  Bible  its  great 


I 


THE  KEDEMPTIVE  KEVELATION         31 

charm,  and  makes  it  so  different  from  the  sacred  books  of 
other  religions.  Compare  it,  for  example,  with  the  Koran, 
a  book  in  which  the  historical  element  is  totally  absent.  It 
presents  ns  with  a  fall-grown  revelation,  with  no  historical 
preparation  and  no  opportunity  for  further  growth. 

It  follows  from  the  progressive  character  of  the  redemp- 
tive revelation  that  the  earlier  stages  are  I'elatively  imper- 
fect. As  compared  with  the  fulness  of  gi-ace  and  truth 
revealed  in  Jesus  Christ,  the  highest  point  reached  by 
the  Old  Testament  revelation  seems  low  and  inadequate. 
From  the  nature  of  the  case  it  could  not  be  otherwise. 
What  Paul  said  in  view  of  the  contrast  between  the  pres- 
ent and  the  future  life,  the  Old  Testament  prophets  and 
teachei's  might  have  said  in  regard  to  the  contrast  be- 
tween their  stage  of  revelation  and  that  which  was  to  come 
in  Christ,  "  "VYe  know  in  part,  and  we  prophesy  in  part. 
Kow  we  see  in  a  mirror  darkly  "  (1  Cor.  xiii.  9,  12).  The 
revelation  recorded  in  the  Bible  can  never  be  rightly 
judged  unless  this  fact  be  borne  in  mind,  and  due  allow- 
ance made  for  it.  The  truth  of  the  lower  stage  is  relative 
and  imperfect.  "When  I  was  a  child,  I  spake  as  a  child, 
I  felt  as  a  child,  I  thought  as  a  child  ;  now  that  I  have 
become  a  man  I  have  put  away  childish  things  "  (1  Cor. 
xiii.  11).  Children  know  things  under  imperfect  forms. 
Their  stage  of  development  permits  no  more.  It  is  not 
enough  to  say  that  in  the  lower  stage  we  have  only  a  lesser 
quantity  of  truth,  which  is  supplemented  in  the  higher. 
It  is  a  less  perfect  truth,  a  truth  that  is  only  relatively  true. 
The  fuller  truth  of  manhood  does  not  only  add  something 
to  the  childish  view  ;  it  corrects  it.  "  When  that  which 
is  perfect  is  come,  that  which  is  in  part  is  done  away  " 
(1  Cor.  xiii.  10).  All  of  its  truth  is  taken  up  into  a  higher 
truth,  while  its  imperfect  element  is  thrown  away  as  a 
husk  from  Mdiich  the  kernel  has  been  taken.  Our  Saviour 
himself  recognizes  this  principle  in  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount,     He  says  that  he  came  not  to  destroy  but  to  f ul- 


32  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

til  tlie  law  (Matt.  v.  17).  But  he  proceeds  to  fulfil  it  by 
bringing  its  precepts  up  to  the  level  of  a  loftier  morality 
than  the  Jew  of  the  Old  Dispensation  from  his  stage  of 
knowledge  could  possibly  find  in  them  (Matt.  v.  17-48). 
As  has  been  beautifully  and  truly  said,  "  Jesus  puts  him- 
self under  the  law,  so  far  as  it  is  divine, 'above  it,  so  far 
as  it  is  Mosaic"  (Orelli,  "Old  Testament  Prophecy,"  Eng. 
Trans.,  p.  57).  In  the  earlier  stages  of  revelation — and 
measurably  in  all  its  stages — God  adapts  His  method  to  the 
understanding  of  men.  He  exercises  a  certain  condescen- 
sion to  human  infirmity  and  imperfection.  As  Calvin  has 
said,  "  For  who,  even  of  the  meanest  capacity,  understands 
not  that  God  lisps,  as  it  were,  with  us,  just  as  nurses  are 
accustomed  to  speak  to  infants?"  ("Institutes,"  Bk.  I.,  ch. 
xiii.,  §  1). 

It  is  thus  we  are  to  explain  some  of  the  chief  difficulties 
which  present  themselves  in  the  study  of  the  Bible.  The 
relative  imperfections  of  the  Jewish  Law,  the  moral  prob- 
lems involved  in  the  history  of  the  Canaanitish  wars,  the 
apparently  defective  morality  of  even  inspired  Hebrew 
thought,  as  evidenced,  e.g.^  by  the  imprecatory  Psalms, 
the  moral  and  spiritual  inferiority  of  the  Old  Testament 
to  the  New,  are  to  be  regarded  as  inevitable  incidents  of 
the  process  of  revelation. 

lY.  In  conclusion,  let  us  look  briefly  at  the  stages  of  the 
redemptive  revelation.  This  part  of  our  subject  has  been 
to  some  extent  anticipated. 

According  to  the  Biblical  record,  God  has  revealed  Him- 
self in  two  great  dispensations  of  His  grace,  which  we 
designate  respectively  as  the  Old  and  the  New. 

1.  The  Old  Dispensation  is.  connected  with  the  history 
of  the  Hebrew  nation  and  its  preparation  to  be  the  bearer 
of  the  redemptive  revelation  to  mankind.  It  falls  into  the 
three  stages  of  the  Patriarchal,  the  Legal,  and  the  Propheti- 
cal. As  in  the  New  Dispensation,  the  dominant  idea  is 
redemption,  or  the  coming  of  God's  Kingdom.     But  here 


THE   KEDEMPTIVE   EEVELATION  33 

the  external  or  temporal  redemption  overshadows  the 
spiritual  redemption,  so  far  as  the  present  is  concerned, 
while  the  deliverance  from  sin  and  the  establishment  of 
God's  Kingdom  as  a  spiritual  reign  of  God  belongs  largely 
to  the  future.  In  the  patriarchal  period  God  makes  Him- 
self known  as  the  one  true  God,  as  distinct  from  the 
heathen  divinities.  He  manifests  His  power  and  His 
holiness.  His  revelation  is  confined  to  a  single  family. 
With  them  a  covenant  is  established.  To  them  a  promise 
is  given,  which  clearly,  though  in  very  general  terms,  as- 
sures them  that  through  their  instrumentality  the  whole 
race  is  to  receive  the  divine  revelation  and  to  be  visited  by 
the  divine  grace.  In  the  legal  stage  a  people  is  chosen,  a 
law  of  constitution  given,  institutions  religious  and  political 
founded,  a  fuller  revelation  made  of  the  holiness  of  God. 
The  idea  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  only  partially  realized 
in  the  Jewish  commonwealth,  makes  its  appearance.  The 
institutions  of  this  period  are  typical,  turning  men's 
thoughts  to  a  divine  salvation  which  is  only  vaguely  un- 
derstood. In  this  period  the  promise  is  reasserted.  The 
Chosen  People  know  that  they  have  been  selected  to  be 
the  channel  of  God's  blessings  to  mankind.  In  the  pro- 
phetic period,  as  God  trains  His  People  in  the  hard  school 
of  suffering,  punishing  them  for  their  sins  and  teaching 
them  their  dependence  upon  Him,  the  hope  of  the  future 
becomes  the  prominent  element  in  the  revelation.  The 
coming  Kingdom  of  God  and  the  spiritual  redemption  fill 
up  the  prophet's  horizon.  The  advent  of  the  Messiah,  the 
Redeemer  and  the  King  of  the  divine  Kingdom,  is  more  and 
more  clearly  descried.  The  redemptive  work  of  the  Christ, 
and  especially  his  atoning  work  as  the  vicarious  sufferer 
for  the  race,  begins  to  appear.  A  I^ew  Covenant  of  spir- 
itual import,  the  blessed  gift  of  which  is  the  forgiveness 
of  sins,  is  promised  (Jer.  xxxi.  31  seq.).  The  heathen  na- 
tions are  to  be  gathered  into  the  Kingdom  and  made  par- 
takers of  the  divine  redemption. 
3 


34  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

2.  And  now  the  Xew  Dispensation  dawns.  It  is  in 
Jesus  Christ  that  the  redemptive  revelation  reaches  its 
consummation.  Hitherto  God  had  revealed  Himself,  so 
to  speak,  at  second  hand,  through  men  and  by  historical 
and  natural  agencies.  IS^ow  He  becomes  incarnate  in  the 
person  of  the  well-beloved  Son.  The  Word  becomes 
flesh.  The  onlj-begotten  Son,  which  was  in  the  bosom  of 
the  Father,  declares  Him  (John  i.  14,  18).  He  can  say 
to  the  perplexed  disciple  who  asks  that  he  may  be  shown 
the  Father,  "  Have  I  been  so  long  time  with  you,  and 
dost  thou  not  know  me,  Philip  ?  he  that  hath  seen  me 
hath  seen  the  Father "  (John  xiv.  9).  His  wondering 
followers  hear  him  say,  "  All  things  have  been  delivered 
unto  me  of  my  Father ;  and  no  one  knoweth  the  Son  save 
the  Father ;  neither  doth  any  know  the  Father  save  the 
Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  willeth  to  reveal 
Him"  (Matt.  xi.  27).  Jesus  Christ  is  the  present  God. 
By  his  teaching  and  his  work  he  fulfils  the  Law.  He 
preaches  the  redemption  from  sin,  the  Gospel  of  grace. 
He  establishes  the  Kingdom  of  God  in  his  own  person 
and  calls  all  men  unto  it.  By  his  death  he  makes  pro- 
pitiation for  sin.  By  the  sending  of  his  Spirit  he  founds 
the  Chi-istian  church  and  sets  in  operation  the  agencies 
by  which  the  world  is  to  be  redeemed  and  God's  kingdom 
established  on  earth.  Through  him  life  and  immortality 
are  brought  to  light.  He  gives  the  assurance  of  the  final 
triumph  of  the  Kingdom  and  the  overthrow  of  evil. 

The  redemptive  revelation  was  completed  by  Christ's 
disciples.  Men  who  knew  him,  who  had  imbibed  his 
spirit,  who  had  learned  the  truth  from  his  lips,  were 
filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit  and  enabled  to  make  known 
the  truth  which  he  could  not  reveal  fully  and  clearly 
while  he  was  on  earth,  because  it  could  only  be  under- 
stood and  received  in  the  light  of  his  finished  work  and 
his  entrance  into  his  kingly  glor3\ 

With  Christ  and  his  disciples  the  redemptive  revela- 


THE   REDEMPTIVE   REVELATION  35 

tiori  is  finished.  It  has  been  given  in  its  completeness  to 
mankind  and  needs  only  to  be  appropriated.  All  that 
men  need  to  know  of  God  and  His  ways,  in  order  that 
they  may  be  delivered  from  sin  and  its  consequences,  and 
restored  to  the  lost  birthright  of  the  sons  of  God,  has 
been  revealed  to  them.  If  they  will,  they  may  know  God 
as  He  is  and  find  in  Him  the  snpply  of  all  their  needs. 
For  this  is  eternal  life  that  they  should  know  the  only 
true  God  and  Jesus  Christ  whom  He  has  sent. 

One  final  question  :  Is  there  to  be  any  higher  revela- 
tion of  God  ?  In  one  sense,  yes.  In  the  blessedness  of 
heaven,  and  still  more  in  the  final  state,  we  shall  know 
God  even  as  also  we  are  known.  Yet  it  is  doubtful 
whether  that  should  be  called  a  new  revelation.  Rather 
will  it  not  be  the  full  appropriation  of  the  present  reve- 
lation, when  every  hindrance  is  removed  ?  Sin  will  be 
gone,  the  spiritual  vision  will  be  clarified,  and  we  shall  see 
God  in  all  the  perfectness  of  His  redemptive  revelation. 


III. 

THE  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY 

It  may  seem  almost  absurd  to  attempt  to  present,  in  a 
single  chapter  a  subject  like  this,  upon  which  whole  libra- 
ries have  been  written.  And  certainly  the  difficulty  of 
doing  so  with  any  degree  of  success  is  very  great.  Yet, 
even  at  the  risk  of  giving  scarcely  more  than  a  dry  enu- 
meration of  the  proofs,  I  shall  make  the  trial.  A  bird's- 
eye  view  is  unsatisfactorj'  enough,  but  it  has  its  value.  It 
often  opens  the  way  for  a  more  careful  examination,  to 
which  it  serves  to  give  intelligent  direction.  So  I  hope  it 
will  be  in  our  case.  If  this  brief  survey  of  the  great  field 
shall  lead  anyone  to  a  thorough  and  thoughtful  study  of 
the  subject,  my  purpose  will  have  been  amply  fulfilled. 

Before  passing  to  the  evidences  themselves,  let  me  say 
a  word  on  the  nature  of  the  proof.  Here,  as  in  the  case  of 
the  argument  for  the  divine  existence,  the  revelation  is 
itself  the  proof,  in  what  it  is  and  what  it  does — its  nature 
and  its  effects.  As  there  we  sought  for  the  different 
methods  of  the  divine  revelation  and  found  in  each  an 
argument,  so  here.  Only  it  is  to  be  observed  that  here 
we  have  to  do  with  a  revelation  that  is  more  complex  and 
difficult  of  exhibition,  so  that  it  will  not  be  so  easy  to  give 
an  exhaustive  and  logical  presentation  of  the  arguments. 

A  word,  also,  respecting  the  point  of  view  from  which 
the  evidences  are  to  be  presented.  We  can  readily  see 
that  the  proof  will  vary  in  its  form  according  to  the  class 
which  it  is  desired  to  reach.  The  Christian  who  seeks  to 
justify  to  his  intellect  the  faith  that  long  ago  carried  con- 


THE   EVIDENCES    OF   CHRISTIANITY  37 

viction  to  his  heart ;  the  honest  inquirer  respecting  the 
truth  that  is  as  yet  unverified  in  his  experience  ;  the  young 
man  or  woman  who  is  making  the  transition  from  an  in- 
herited to  a  personal  faith  ;  the  unbeliever  who  actively 
opposes  Christianity  ;  the  heathen  who  is  entangled  in  the 
prepossessions  and  prejudices  of  a  false  religion — these 
different  classes  need  each  to  be  met  with  a  different 
handling  of  the  arguments.  But  there  is  one  stand-point 
which  seems  to  be  central  and  to  furnish  a  rallying-point 
for  all  the  others.  It  is  that  of  the  Christian  who,  already 
convinced  in  heart  and  head  of  the  truth  of  Christianity, 
is  asked  for  a  reason  of  the  hope  that  is  in  him.  If  he 
can  with  rational  argument  make  good  his  position,  if  he 
can  clearly  show  the  strong  foundations  on  which  his  faith 
rests,  the  task  is  accomplished.  He  gives  to  each  class 
the  answer  which  it  needs.  It  is  from  this  point  of  view 
that  I  ask  you  to  consider  the  subject. 

The  proof  falls,  naturally,  into  two  branches  : 

I.  The  Experimental  Proof. 

II,  The  Confirmatory. 

Under  the  latter  head  we  shall  distinguish  a  number  of 
subordinate  arguments. 

I.  We  begin  with  the  proof  which  is  at  once  the  sim- 
plest and  the  most  convincing,  namely,  that  from  personal 
experience. 

Christianity  does  not  come  to  men  primarily  as  a  sys- 
tem of  doctrine  demanding  the  assent  of  the  intellect,  but 
rather  as  a  practical  remedy  for  sin  asking  the  consent  of 
the  will  to  its  application.  The  Gospel  offers  pardon  for 
sin  on  the  ground  of  Christ's  atoning  work,  restoration  to 
fellowship  and  sonship  with  God,  and  the  grace  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  as  the  power  by  which  sin  may  be  overcome 
and  holiness  attained.  The  means  or  instrument  by  which 
this  blessing  is  appropriated  is  faith  in  Christ — a  faith 
which  consists  primarily  in  trust,  an  act  of  the  will,  a  giv- 
ing; of  one's  self  in  entire  submission  into  the  hands  of  the 


38  PKESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

Saviour.  Now  this  oifer  can  only  be  tested  in  one  way, 
that  is,  by  a  personal  trial.  It  belongs  to  the  realm  of 
inward  and  personal  experience.  And  those  who  have 
fully  and  fairly  tried  it  have  never  found  it  to  fail.  The 
result  of  faith  is  that  experience  which  we  call  conversion 
or  regeneration,  the  change  of  heart,  in  which  God  brings 
the  soul  into  an  entirely  new  relation  to  Himself.  Sin  is 
forgiven,  God  makes  Himself  known  as  the  personal 
Father,  Christ  begins  (to  use  Paul's  striking  language)  to 
"  dwell  in  the  heart  by  faith,"  the  Spirit  bears  witness 
with  our  spirits  that  we  are  the  sons  of  God,  a  new  direc- 
tion is  given  to  the  will,  so  that  the  converted  man  may 
be  truly  said  to  have  died  unto  sin  and  to  live  unto  right- 
eousness. The  Christian  is  a  new  creation.  Old  things 
have  passed  away  ;  behold,  all  things  have  become  new. 
Horace  Bushnell  has  expressed  in  glowing  language  the 
nature  and  results  of  the  initial  faith  of  the  Christian  life 
("Life,"  p.  192  seq.)  : 

"  Christian  faith  is  the  faith  of  a  transaction.  It  is  not 
the  committing  of  one's  thought  in  assent  to  any  proposi- 
tion, but  the  trusting  of  one's  being  to  a  Being,  there  to 
be  rested,  kept,  guided,  moulded,  governed,  and  possessed 
forever."  "  It  gives  you  God,  tills  you  with  God  in  im- 
mediate, experimental  knowledge,  puts  you  in  possession 
of  all  there  is  in  Him,  and  allows  you  to  be  invested  with 
His  character  itself." 

ISTow  here  is  God  pei'sonally  present  and  active  in  the 
very  soul,  manifesting  Himself  as  He  does  not  to  the 
world.  I  am  not  speaking  of  the  high- wrought  mystical 
experiences  which  some  Christians  claim  to  have  had,  but 
of  the  normal  experiences  which  all  Christians  have  had. 
This  presence  of  God  is  a  reality  which  cannot  be  doubted. 
The  certainty  which  it  produces  possesses  the  highest  va- 
lidity. It  is  a  first-hand  knowledge.  It  is  like  the  knowl- 
edge  we   have   of   our   nearest  and   dearest   friends,  the 


THE   EVIDENCES   OF    CHRISTIANITY  39 

knowledge  that  reveals  to  us  their  inmost  nature.  It  is 
the  knowledge  of  a  great  crisis  which  has  given  to  life  a 
new  meaning.  Or  if  there  has  been  no  such  definite  ex- 
perience, as  in  the  case  of  those  who  have  been  brought 
by  Christian  nurture  through  a  gradual  process  into  the 
fulness  of  the  Christian  life,  it  is  like  the  first  knowledge 
of  a  parent's  love  which  antedates  and  lays  the  basis  for 
all  other  knowledge.  How  wonderful  aie  its  first  effects, 
the  peace  and  rest  and  joy  it  produces,  the  new  relation  to 
God  and  men  and  the  world  !  Jonathan  Edwards's  de- 
scription of  the  first  effects  of  his  own  conversion  is  repre- 
sentative ("  Life,"  p.  61) : 

"  The  appearance  of  everything  was  altered  ;  there 
seemed  to  be,  as  it  were,  a  calm,  sweet  cast  of  appearance 
of  divine  glory  in  almost  everything.  God's  excellency. 
His  wisdom,  His  purity  and  love  seemed  to  appear  in 
everything;  in  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars  ;  in  the  clouds  and 
blue  sky  ;  in  the  grass,  flowers,  trees  ;  in  the  water  and  all 
nature." 

There  are  doubtful  Christians,  but  in  all  normal  Chris- 
tian experience  the  reality  of  God's  presence  in  conver- 
sion is  the  one  fact  that  can  never  be  doubted,  the  fixed 
point  in  the  spiritual  life.  Many  a  Christian  has  gone 
cheerfully  to  martyrdom  to  attest  the  truth  of  his  convic- 
tion, saying  with  Paul,  "  I  know  whom  I  have  believed.'' 

Nor  is  this  all.  The  Christian  is  not  obliged,  in  order 
to  justify  his  faith,  to  appeal  to  the  past  alone.  There  is 
a  growing  and  cumulative  experience  in  the  Christian  life 
which  is  a  perennial  proof  of  the  truth  of  the  Gospel. 
The  Christian's  fellowship  is  with  the  Father  and  His 
Son  Jesus  Christ.  It  is  a  personal  relation.  Spirit  meet- 
ing spirit  in  a  communion  as  real  and  certain  in  its  way  as 
any  that  exists  between  man  and  man.  In  this  blessed 
intercourse  eternal  life  has  begun  (John  xvii.  3).  God's 
help  is  given   in   diflaculty,  His  comfort  in  sorrow,  His 


40  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

strength  in  weakness,  His  guidance  in  perplexity.  In  the 
work  of  sanctification  in  which  sin  is  overcome  and  the 
soul  is  formed  into  the  image  of  Christ,  and  in  the  work 
of  the  Kingdom,  in  which  we  are  fellow-laborers  with 
God,  His  Spirit  is  the  power  of  whose  constant  presence 
and  aid  we  are  abidingly  conscions.  In  all  these  expe- 
riences God  becomes  better  known,  and  His  redemptive 
revelation  more  and  more  truly  realized.  The  Cliristian's 
certainty  is  thus  constantly  growing.  "  The  path  of  the 
just  is  as  the  shining  light,  which  shineth  more  and  more 
unto  the  perfect  day  "  (Prov.  iv.  18). 

This,  then,  is  the  strong  foundation  upon  which  the 
Christian's  faith  rests.  The  Scriptures  teach  that  this 
inner  certainty,  this  invincible  conviction  is  wrought  by 
God  Himself  by  the  power  of  His  Holy  Spirit  actually 
present  and  working  in  the  soul  (John  vii.  37-39  ;  xvi.  12- 
15  ;  Eom.  viii.  16  ;  1  Cor.  ii.  4,  5  ;  1  John  v.  6-10).  To 
this  testiinonium  Spirittis  Sancti,  this  witness  of  the 
Spirit,  the  Protestant  Keformers  delighted  to  appeal  in 
their  controversies  with  the  Roman  Catholics,  who  found 
their  authority  in  church  and  Pope.  This  always  has  been 
and  alwaj's  will  be  the  ultimate  proof.  We  know  the  ex- 
istence of  the  sun  because  his  light  and  warmth  and  life 
are  all  about  us.  We  know  God  and  Christ  and  all  the 
revelation  of  God's  grace  because  they  are  within  us. 
The  child  or  the  savage  knows  the  existence  of  the  sun  as 
truly,  though  not  with  as  much  fulness  and  precision  of 
knowledge,  as  the  scientist.  The  humblest  Christian,  ig- 
norant of  all  the  knowledge  of  the  schools,  who  perhaps 
has  never  heard  of  the  Evidences  of  Christianity,  knows 
the  truth  of  the  Christian  revelation  with  as  much  cer- 
tainty as  the  most  learned  theologian." 

*  In  the  author's  manuscript  are  these  pencilled  lines:  "Add  to  the 
experience  of  the  individual  that  of  the  Christian  church."  For  that 
we  must  now  refer  the  reader  to  one  of  his  former  books — "  The  Evi- 
dence of  Christian  Experience.'' 


THE   EVIDENCES   OP   CHRISTIANITY  41 

It  is  true  that  there  is  something  private  and  personal 
about  this  proof.  The  certainty  upon  which  it  is  based  is 
a  subjective  certainty.  It  is  always  possible  for  the  un- 
believer to  deny  it,  to  declare  that  he  has  had  no  such 
experience,  and  that  he  sees  no  reason  to  regard  it  as  any- 
thing else  than  a  delusion — in  many  cases  doubtless  sin- 
cere and  pious,  but  still  a  figment  of  the  imagination. 
The  Christian  readily  admits  the  subjective  character  of 
the  argument.  Indeed,  he  asserts  that  it  could  not  be 
different.  It  is  not  the  only  kind  of  knowledge  in  the 
world  which  is  the  property  of  the  individual  rather  than 
of  mankind.  The  blind  man's  eyes  must  be  opened  be- 
fore he  can  see  the  world  in  all  its  beauty.  Only  the 
artist's  training  will  give  one  the  artist's  susceptibility  and 
skill.  He  who  will  understand  love  and  self-sacrifice  must 
himself  have  loved  and  denied  himself.  And  not  differ- 
ent is  it  in  the  highest  sphere,  out  of  which  men  are  shut 
not  only  by  lack  of  training  but  by  sin.  "  The  natural 
man  receiveth  not  the  things  of  the  Spirit  of  God  :  for 
they  are  foolishness  unto  him  :  neither  can  he  know  them, 
because  they  are  spiritually  discerned"  (1  Cor.  ii.  14). 
Accordingly,  the  great  effort  of  the  Christian  minister, 
and  every  other  Christian  worker,  must  be  to  bring  men 
to  the  trial  of  Christianity.  All  other  arguments  are 
weak  in  comparison  with  that  of  personal  experience.  If 
the  will  can  once  be  brought  to  make  the  trial,  then 
assuredly  the  divine  light  will  pour  into  the  soul.  And 
let  us  not  ignore  the  influence  of  the  Christian's  personal 
conviction  in  bringing  unbelievers,  and  especially  the 
earnest  seekers  after  light  who  cannot  fairly  be  classed 
with  unbelievers,  to  the  truth.  A  real  belief  can  never 
be  mistaken  for  mere  make-believe.  There  is  attractive 
power  in  it.  It  is  the  bridge  over  which  many  a  soul 
passes  to  personal  faith.  After  our  Saviour's  conversation 
with  the  woman  of  Samaria,  as  we  are  told,  "  many  of  the 
Samaritans  of  that  city  believed  on  him  for  the  saying  of 


42  PEESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

the  woman,  which  testified,  He  told  me  all  that  ever  I 
did."  Ent  when  he  came  into  their  city  their  faith  be- 
came no  longer  second-hand,  but  personal.  "Many  more 
believed  because  of  his  own  word  ;  and  said  unto  the 
woman,  Kow  we  believe,  not  because  of  thy  saying  ;  for 
we  have  heard  him  ourselves,  and  know  that  this  is  indeed 
the  Christ,  the  Saviour  of  the  world  "  (John  iv.  39-42). 

II.  We  come  now  to  the  Confirmatory  Proof.  The 
inner  certainty  of  personal  experience  seeks,  like  all  such 
knowledge,  external  verification.  For  this  it  finds  abun- 
dant material.  The  redemptive  revelation  makes  its  pres- 
ence known  in  many  ways  and  each  furnishes  an  ai'gu- 
ment  for  its  reality  and  truth. 

1.  We  begin  with  the  argument  derived  from  the  Nat- 
ure of  the  Christian  System.  This  is  closely  allied  to  the 
experimental  proof  and  might  even  seem,  if  not  carefully 
examined,  to  be  a  repetition  of  it.  It  is,  however,  in  real- 
ity quite  different.  In  the  experimental  argument  the 
proof  is  derived  from  the  personal  knowledge  in  the  re- 
ligious life  of  the  facts  and  truths  which  constitute  the 
redemptive  revelation.  In  the  argument  now  before  us 
these  same  facts  are  subjected  to  the  tests  of  the  reason. 
It  is  argued  that  the  revelation  is  true  because  it  is  ra- 
tional, or,  to  state  the  argument  more  specifically,  because 
it  is  consonant  with  the  character  of  God  and  the  needs  of 
men.  This  is  the  line  of  proof  which  has  been  developed 
with  so  much  power  and  beauty  by  Erskine  of  Linlathen 
in  that  book  which  has  brought  conviction  to  so  many  in- 
quiring souls,  the  "Remarks  on  the  Internal  Evidence  for 
the  Truth  of  Revealed  Religion."  Erskine  called  it  the 
internal  evidence,  because  it  is  drawn  from  the  internal 
facts  of  the  Christian  system,  rather  than  from  miracles 
and  prophecy  and  the  outward  effects  of  Christianity. 

The  redemptive  revelation  is  what  we  should  rationally 
expect  from  the  character  of  God.  All  men  have  a  knowl- 
edge of  Him  throuo;h  His  natural  revelation.     This  is  in- 


THE  EVIDENCES   OF   CHKISTIANITY  43 

sufficient  for  their  needs,  but  it  is  sufficient  to  give  them 
much  true  knowledge  respecting  the  divine  character. 
Now  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  such  a  Being  would 
interpose  to  furnish  His  sinful  creatures  with  the  knowl- 
edt)-e  and  help  they  need  for  their  salvation.  And  when 
we  come  to  examine  the  revelation  which  the  Scriptures 
and  Christian  experience  declare  to  have  been  given,  we 
liud  that  it  is  in  all  respects  worthy  of  God.  The  divine 
love,  the  Fatherhood  of  God,  the  stooping  of  God  to  earth 
in  the  incarnation,  the  revelation  through  Jesus  Christ 
the  God-man,  the  atoning  death  upon  the  cross  with  its 
disclosures  of  the  depths  of  divine  compassion,  the  send- 
ing of  the  Spirit,  the  establishment  of  the  Christian 
church,  the  bestowal  of  pardon  upon  guilty  sinners,  their 
restoration  to  sonship,  the  promised  triumphs  of  the  King- 
dom, the  blessedness  of  heaven,  the  final  subduing  of 
evil  —  these  are  facts  and  truths  which  bear  the  divine 
stamp  upon  them.  Men  could  not  have  invented  such 
ideas.  Only  the  all-holy  One  Himself  could  be  their  au- 
thor. If  these  things  be  not  of  God,  then  there  is  no 
God.  We  jDronounce  unhesitatingly  against  the  claims 
of  heathen  religions,  because  their  conceptions  of  God  are 
not  worthy  of  God.  We  pronounce  as  unhesitatingly  in 
favor  of  Christianity  because  its  conceptions  of  God  are 
worthy  of  God. 

Moreover,  the  redemptive  revelation  is  precisely  adapted 
to  the  needs  of  sinful,  lost  men.  The  way  of  salvation 
through  faith  in  a  crucified  Saviour  who  has  made  atone- 
ment for  human  sin,  so  that  God  speaks  His  justifying 
word  of  grace  before  a  single  act  of  true  holiness  has  been 
achieved,  is  just  what  is  needed  to  give  men  the  courage 
and  the  motive  to  enter  upon  that  life  of  obedience  and 
service  which  is  the  true  end  of  their  being.  What  sin- 
ners need  is  not  so  much  knowledge  as  spiritual  power, 
and  this  is  what  Christianity  gives  them  by  its  method  of 
redemption  and  the  divine  bestowal  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 


44  PEESENT   DAT   THEOLOGY 

They  need  a  career,  and  this  they  find  in  the  Kingdom  of 
God.  The  methods  of  salvation  which  otlier  religions 
offer  are  not  adapted  to  human  wants.  The  Christian 
method  is. 

I  said  that  in  this  argument  we  subject  the  redemptive 
revelation  to  the  tests  of  reason.  Let  me  qualify  my 
statement.  I  do  not  assert  that  reason  in  its  natural  state 
is  capable  of  sitting  in  judgment  upon  the  Christian  reve- 
lation. It  is  inevitable  that  to  the  reason  of  the  man  who 
has  had  no  personal  experience  of  God  as  He  has  revealed 
Himself  in  Christ  these  facts  should  in  many  respects 
seem  to  be  foolishness.  It  is  to  the  regenerate  reason 
alone  that  the  argument  with  which  we  are  concerned  car- 
ries its  full  force.  The  eye  must  be  single  before  the 
whole  body  can  be  full  of  light.  And  yet  even  the  natu- 
ral reason  can  recognize  something  of  the  intrinsic  beauty 
and  verisimilitude  of  the  Christian  system.  The  anima 
naturaliter  Christiana,  as  Tertullian  so  finely  called  it, 
the  soul  which  is  by  nature  Christian,  even  before  it 
comes  to  Christ,  finds  in  Christianity  oftentimes  a  truth 
which  takes  possession  of  the  reason,  and  leads  the  will 
to  the  humble  acceptance  of  the  Saviour.  So  it  was  with 
Augustine.     So  it  has  been  to  many  a  soul  since  his  day. 

2.  The  heart  of  the  redemptive  revelation  is  Christ. 
The  whole  revelation  is  concentrated  in  him  as  in  a  focus. 
"When,  therefore,  we  pass  to  the  consideration  of  the  ar- 
gument from  the  Personality  and  Character  of  Christ,  we 
are  simply  continuing  the  proof  from  the  nature  of  the 
Christian  system.  We  shall  look  at  his  human  life,  with 
no  assumptions  respecting  his  divinity,  leaving  to  the 
conclusion  all  inferences  as  to  his  higher  nature. 

Jesus  Christ  was  the  child  of  poor  and  uneducated 
peasants.  He  was  boi'n  in  one  of  the  smallest  towns  and 
brought  up  in  one  of  the  most  despised  towns  of  a  coun- 
tvy  that  had  no  status  among  the  nations,  either  politically 
or  intellectually.     He  had  no  advantages  in  the  way  of 


THE   EVIDENCES   OF    CHEISTIANITY  45 

early  education.  His  occupation  was  that  of  a  mechanic, 
his  associations  chiefly  with  the  humble  and  unlettered. 
His  environment  was  not  such  as  to  favor  the  production 
of  a  great  man.  Look  first  at  the  moral  greatness  of  this 
man's  life  and  character.  It  was  a  life  of  spotless  parity. 
On  this  point  we  have  not  only  his  own  testimony  and 
that  of  his  disciples,  but  his  life  is  before  us  in  the  four 
Gospels,  in  its  perfect  words  and  works.  To  call  it  "  the 
great  moral  miracle  "  is  scarcely  to  use  a  metaphor.  And 
then  it  was  a  life  of  entire  self-sacrifice,  of  constant  com- 
munion with  God.  To  live  in  his  presence  gave  one  a 
new  idea  of  God. 

Then  look  at  Christ's  teachings.  Even  unbelief  stands 
with  uncovered  head  before  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount, 
and  confesses  that  here  is  the  perfect  morality.  Xever 
man  spake  like  this  man.  After  nineteen  centuries  the 
moral  ideal  which  Jesus  exhibited  still  towers  above  the 
world's  practice  like  some  lofty  unclirabed  mountain. 
And  the  impression  made  by  the  morality  he  taught  is 
only  increased  when  we  consider  his  spiritual  teachings 
and  his  Gospel  of  salvation. 

Even  more  wonderful  was  the  plan  of  Christ,  the  estab- 
lishment of  a  kingdom  of  God,  which  is  to  grow  until  the 
whole  race  shall  be  brought  under  its  sway.  Other  men 
have  had  their  schemes  of  universal  conquest,  the  Alex- 
anders and  Csesars  ;  but  their  plans  were  contracted  and 
short-sighted.  The  means  they  employed  were  material. 
The  means  Jesus  employed  were  spiritual.  Their  plans 
failed  utterly.  Christ's  plan  has  from  the  first  been  ad- 
vancing steadily  in  its  fulfilment,  until  no  thoughtful 
mind  can  doubt  its  final  complete  success. 

This  man  claimed  to  be  divine.  He  declared  that  he 
had  come  to  earth  to  be  the  Saviour  of  mankind.  He 
calmly  asserted  that  he  was  to  judge  the  race  and  assign 
to  men  their  final  destiny.  He  maintained  that  this  des- 
tiny would  depend  upon  the  personal  relation  of  men  to 


46  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

him  and  his  gospel.  He  appropriated  all  the  predictions 
of  the  ancient  prophets.  And  the  impression  which  he 
made  upon  his  followers  was  such  that,  one  and  all,  they 
asserted  his  divinity,  some  in  language  even  stronger  than 
he  employed. 

And  then,  what  a  death  was  that  of  Jesus — a  death  vol- 
untarily accepted,  a  death  avowedly  for  the  salvation  of 
the  race.  By  it  men  were  led  to  realize  the  divine  love 
and  self-sacrifice.  Every  incident  in  the  painful  history 
of  the  Saviour's  last  days  and  hours  was  worthy  of  the 
man  and  correspondent  to  his  claims.  We  gather  our 
parallels  from  the  benefactors  and  martyrs  of  mankind, 
but  the  comparison  is  all  that  is  needed  to  show  how 
wholly  unique  is  the  death  of  Jesus  Christ. 

Now,  what  shall  we  say  of  all  this  ?  How  shall  we  ac- 
count for  this  man  and  his  work  and  the  claims  he  made  ? 
Science  calls  for  a  sufficient  cause  for  every  phenomenon. 
What  is  the  sufficient  cause,  the  adequate  explanation  of 
this  wonderful  phenomenon  in  human  history  ?  Once 
unbelief  labored  to  prove  that  he  was  an  impostor.  But 
the  facts  made  that  explanation  so  utterly  ridiculous  that 
no  respectable  unbeliever  would  dare  to  advance  it  to-day. 
So  the  endeavor  has  been  made  to  substitute  for  it  the 
view  that  he  was  a  fanatic  or  amiable  enthusiast.  But 
the  calmness,  the  self-poise,  the  forethought,  the  "  sweet 
reasonableness  "  of  the  man  make  that  explanation  almost 
as  inadequate  as  the  other.  Defeated  here,  unbelief  has 
tried  to  show  that  the  marvellous  picture  of  Christ  which 
the  four  Gospels  contain  is  the  production,  either  wholly 
or  in  part,  of  the  evangelists,  or  of  the  first  disciples, 
whose  fond  imaginations  the  evangelists  have  reported. 
But  the  stream  can  be  no  greater  than  its  sources.  Those 
humble  Galilean  peasants  could  not  have  invented  such 
a  character  as  that.  The  explanation  fails  to  do  more 
than  involve  its  authors  in  new  difficulties.  Nor  are  these 
difficulties  diminished  if  the  theory  of  myths  is  appealed 


THE   EVIDElSrCES    OF   CHRISTIANITY  47 

to  in  their  behalf,  for  it  still  remains  to  explain  how  suck 
myths,  so  utterly  different  in  their  quality  from  the  com- 
mon myths  of  history,  could  have  arisen. 

There  is  but  one  satisfactory  and  adequate  explanation, 
and  that  is  the  simple  one  that  Jesus  was  what  he  claimed 
to  be  and  what  his  disciples  believed  him  to  be — the  Son 
of  God,  the  Saviour  of  the  world.  That  life  of  Jesus 
stands  as  an  unsolved  puzzle  in  the  midst  of  human 
history  unless  we  accept  the  assertion  that  he  was  the 
"Word  made  flesh.  If  we  refuse  to  admit  it,  we  throw 
away  the  key  to  human  history.  And  what  shall  we  say 
of  God  and  religion  if  this  be  not  true  ?  Said  Charles 
Kingsley  ("  Westminster  Sermons,"  pp.  5-16) : 

"  Consider  but  this  one  argument.  It  is  no  new  one  ; 
it  has  lain,  I  believe,  unspoken  and  instinctive,  yet  most 
potent  and  inspiring,  in  many  a  mind  in  many  an  age.  If 
there  be  a  God,  must  he  not  be  the  best  of  all  beings  ? 
But  if  he  who  suffered  on  Calvary  were  not  God,  but  a 
mere  creature,  then,  as  I  hold,  there  must  have  been  a 
creature  in  the  universe  better  than  God  himself.  .  .  . 
Man  has  fancied  to  himself  for  eighteen  hundred  years  a 
more  beautiful  God,  a  nobler  God,  a  better  God  than  the 
God  who  actually  exists." 

3.  Still  another  argument  is  derived  from  the  Relation 
of  Christianity  to  the  History  of  the  World.  It  would 
take  us  quite  too  far  afield  were  we  to  attempt  to  treat 
this  argument  with  any  degree  of  fulness.  The  salient 
points  alone  can  be  indicated.  The  proof  is  teleological 
in  its  character,  exhibiting  a  manifest  providential  rela- 
tion. It  aims  to  show  that  Christ  and  Christianity  came 
in  "  the  fulness  of  the  time "  (Gal.  iv.  4),  that  all  the 
movements  of  earlier  history  converge  in  the  Gospel  and 
find  their  meaning  in  it. 

Look  first  at  the  relation  of  Judaism  to  Christianity. 
The  Jews  were  the  people  of  hope.     Their  golden  age,  as 


48  PKESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

has  been  strikingly  said,  lay  not  in  the  past,  like  that  of 
other  nations,  but  in  the  future.  Their  history,  taken  by 
itself,  is  a  torso.  To  understand  Judaism  it  must  be 
viewed  in  the  light  of  Christianity.  We  have  seen  in  a 
previous  chapter  how  the  Hebrews  were  sepai-ated  from 
all  the  other  nations  of  the  earth,  made  the  recipients  of 
a  pure  monotheism,  trained  by  centuries  of  suffering  and 
vicissitude  to  become  the  teachers  of  mankind.  Any 
other  race  would  have  utterly  disappeared  in  the  mis- 
fortunes which  befell  Israel.  But  the  Chosen  People  sur- 
vived, retained  the  consciousness  of  their  mission,  saw 
ever  more  clearly  the  future  that  lay  before  them.  The 
coming  kingdom  of  God  and  the  Messiah  appeared  more 
and  more  fully  upon  the  prophetic  horizon.  The  germs 
of  doctrines  that  had  power  to  ti'ansform  the  world  lay 
waiting  to  be  fructified  in  their  religious  system.  The 
Gospel  came  as  the  fiulfilment  of  the  long  history,  the  ex- 
planation of  its  meaning,  the  key  to  its  problems.  Christ 
came  as  the  fulfilment  of  the  messianic  ideal.  And  be- 
fore we  leave  this  branch  of  our  subject,  let  us  take  a 
single  glance  at  the  condition  of  the  Jewish  nation  when 
Christ  appeared.  The  conquests  and  political  oppression 
of  their  later  history  had  scattered  the  Jews  over  the 
whole  Roman  Empire.  Especially  were  they  concentrated 
in  the  great  centres  of  civilization — Rome,  Corinth,  Alex- 
andria, Antioch,  The  Diaspora,  or  Jews  of  the  disper- 
sion, had  taken  on  a  measure  of  Roman  civilization. 
They  had  learned  to  speak  the  Greek  language,  the  lingua 
franca  of  the  times.  Their  contact  with  heathenism  had 
at  once  strengthened  their  faith  in  monotheism  and  made 
them  less  rigid  in  their  religious  ideas  and  more  ready  to 
welcome  new  light.  Thus  was  the  way  opened  for  the 
spread  of  Christianity  by  their  means. 

In  the  relation  of  heathenism  to  Christianity  a  like  prep- 
aration and  providential  connection  may  be  recognized. 
I  referred  in  the  last  chapter  to  the  providential  training 


THE   EVIDENCES   OF   CHRISTIANITY  49 

of  the  heathen  nations.  Their  whole  history  bears  witness 
to  it.  There  was  an  intellectual  preparation  for  Christian- 
ity in  ancient  culture.  The  literature,  art,  natural  science, 
and  especially  the  philosophy  of  Greece,  shaped  that 
wonderful  language  which  was  to  carry  the  Gospel  to  the 
ends  of  the  known  world  and  furnished  the  forms  of 
thought  which  the  religion  of  the  Crucified  was  to  ap- 
propriate and  consecrate  to  its  higher  uses.  How  great  is 
the  debt  which  the  Christian  church  owes  to  Plato's 
philosophy,  and  who  can  doubt  that  there  was  a  divine 
connection  between  the  Academy  and  the  Gospel  ?  There 
was  also  a  moral  preparation  in  the  religions  of  the 
ancient  world.  Imperfect  and  perverted  as  they  were, 
yet  they  kept  alive  the  sense  of  need  for  a  higher  and 
truer  revelation.  And  when  they  lost  their  power  and 
sank  into  corruption,  in  the  presence  of  the  fearful  im- 
morality which  had  gained  the  upper  hand  at  the  time  of 
Christ,  the  way  was  opened  for  earnest  men  to  find  in  the 
pure  ethics  of  Christianity  and  the  moral  motive  power 
which  it  furnished  in  its  redemptive  system,  that  perfect 
religion  of  which  their  souls  stood  in  need.  Nor  must 
we  forget  the  political  prepai'ation  for  Christianity  in  the 
history  of  the  heathen  world.  The  Persian  conquests — 
to  go  no  further  back — consolidated  Asia  and  Africa 
about  the  eastern  end  of  the  Mediterranean,  Alexander 
carried  the  Greek  language  and  literature  over  the  Orient. 
Finally  Rome  appeared  upon  the  scene,  and  the  most  re- 
markable political  organization  ever  known,  the  Roman 
Empire,  held  the  civilized  world  under  its  sway.  With- 
out this  preparation  Christianity  would  have  been,  hu- 
manly speaking,  an  impossibility.  With  it  the  spread  of 
the  religion  of  Jesus  was  secured.  The  ancient  world 
was  like  a  great  mass  of  combustible  material  waiting  for 
the  spark  that  should  set  it  afire.  Christ  came  and  soon 
it  was  blazing  far  and  wide.  The  mind  must  be  dull 
indeed  which  can  contemplate  the  wonderful  history  of 
4 


50  PRESENT  DAY    THEOLOGY 

tlie  heathen  world  before  the  Saviour's  coming  and  not 
see  in  it  a  manifest  prej^aration  for  his  religion. 

4.  Again,  we  find  an  argument  in  the  Miracles  which 
accompanied  the  redemptive  revelation.  Diii-ing  the  last 
century  and  the  earlier  part  of  our  own  this  was  the  fa- 
vorite proof,  with  which  only  the  argument  from  prophecy 
was  placed  upon  an  equal  footing.  The  Christian  thought 
of  our  day  has  reacted  from  what  was  undoubtedly  a  too 
exclusive  reliance  upon  these  arguments.  Moreover,  we 
understand  the  nature  of  the  miracles  and  their  relation 
to  the  Christian  revelation  better  than  we  did.  It  is  my 
intention  to  devote  a  chapter  to  the  natm-e  and  true  mean- 
ing of  the  miracles,  and  I  shall  therefore  speak  veiy  briefly 
with  regard  to  them  at  the  present  time.  Miracles  are 
not,  as  the  old  Apologetics  taught,  divine  credentials  at- 
tached externally  to  the  revelation  for  its  authentication. 
They  are  a  part  of  the  revelation  itself.  They  are  not 
violations  of  the  laws  of  nature,  but  events  which  cannot 
be  accounted  for  by  physical  forces  or  liuman  agencies  and 
which  therefore  are  ascribed  to  a  higher  Cause.  They  are 
not  known  as  miracles  simply  by  the  power  manifested 
in  them — that  would  not  distinguish  them  fi'om  the  mir- 
acles of  evil  beings — but  by  their  manifestation  of  God's 
grace  in  redemption.  When  the  redemptive  revelation  ap- 
pears in  the  realm  of  physical  nature  operating  immediately 
and  supernaturally  upon  it,  we  have  a  miracle.  Kow  the 
miracles  had  for  those  who  first  beheld  them  a  very  high 
value.  It  was  not  possible  to  deny  that  here  was  a  more 
than  human  power  at  work.  Of  course  it  was  open  to  the 
caviller  to  declare  that  it  was  a  diabolical  agency,  as  the 
scribes  and  Pharisees  did  with  respect  to  Christ's  mii-acles 
(Matt.  xii.  22-30).  But  the  soul  that  was  willing  to  re- 
ceive them  and  that  saw  in  them  the  manifestation  of  the 
divine  grace,  must  have  been  at  once  awe-struck  and  con- 
vinced. For  us  they  have  a  different  value.  We  do  not 
see  them.     We  have  to  prove  the  miracles  before  we  can 


THE   EVIDENCES   OF   CHRISTIANITY  51 

use  them  in  proof.  But  when  we  have  accepted  the  moral 
miracle  of  Christ's  person  and  work  and  have  experienced 
in  our  own  souls  the  regenerating  influence  of  God's 
spirit,  which  if  not  a  miracle  is  in  many  respects  so  like 
one,  we  are  prepared  to  accept  as  true  the  miracles  which 
the  Bible  relates.  It  is  difficult  to  believe  that  Christ 
should  have  wrought  such  wonders  in  the  spii-itual  world 
and  not  have  wrought  equal  wonders  in  the  material 
world.  And  when  we  find  that  the  miracles  are  inextric- 
ably connected  with  the  history  of  the  redemptive  revela- 
tion and  especially  with  the  history  of  Christ,  we  can  dis- 
cover in  the  connection  of  the  two  an  evidence  that  has  its 
great  value  of  the  truth  of  both.  Pascal  says,  "  Doctrines 
must  be  judged  by  miracles  ;  miracles  must  be  judged  by 
doctrines."  This  is  no  mere  reasoning  in  a  circle.  In  the 
connection  between  tlie  miracles  and  the  revelation,  in  the 
adaptation  of  the  one  to  the  other,  we  have  a  perfectly 
legitimate  argument.  And  the  more  we  know  of  the  men 
who  relate  these  miracles  to  us,  the  more  impossible  it  is  to 
think  that  they  either  invented  them  or  imagined  them. 

5.  Next  comes  the  argument  from  the  Predictions  of 
the  Bible.  Prophecy  is  part  of  the  very  texture  of  the 
Christian  revelation.  The  prophets  were  God's  inspired 
messengers,  they  carried  His  word  to  men.  Prophecy 
was  not  altogether  prediction  of  future  events.  It  was 
largely  concerned  with  present  events.  But  prediction 
was  an  essential  element  in  it.  Over  and  over  again  the 
truth  of  God's  prophets  and  their  difference  from  the 
false  prophets  are  proved  by  the  fulfilment  of  their  pre- 
dictions. The  predictions  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah  respect- 
ing the  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  captivities — to  take  no 
other  instances — stand  in  the  Bible  as  unimpeachable  evi- 
dence of  the  truth  of  the  revelation  of  which  they  form  a 
part.  More  interesting,  and  as  proof  no  less  cogent,  is  the 
long  series  of  predictions  of  the  Messiah,  beginning  with 
the  first  promise  of  the  seed  of  the  woman  which  was  to 


52  pep:sent  day  theology 

braise  the  serpent's  liead,  gathering  strength  in  the  pros- 
perous days  of  the  kingdom  when  David  and  his  immedi- 
ate descendants  sat  upon  tlie  throne  as  types  of  the  coming 
One,  deepening  and  revealing  the  vicarious  sacrifice  of  the 
Servant  of  God  in  the  days  of  the  Captivity,  and  standing 
out  distinct  and  circumstantial  on  the  last  pages  of  the  Old 
Testament  Scriptures.  How  shall  w-e  explain  it  ?  the 
prophecy  and  its  fulfilment  in  Jesus  the  Ciirist  ?  How 
shall  we  explain  the  progressive  f nlfilment  of  the  prophe- 
cies of  the  Old  Testament,  re-emphasized  and  expanded 
by  the  Saviour  himself,  respecting  the  establishment  of 
the  kino;dom  of  God  ?  The  world  has  nothino;  like  this  to 
show  elsewhere.  I  grant  that  the  argun:ientfrom  prophec}' 
has  not  always  been  wisely  managed,  that  there  has  been 
a  tendency  to  find  fulfilments  in  cases  of  doubtful  applica- 
bility. But  making  all  necessary  deduction  for  an  apolo- 
getic zeal  that  has  not  been  always  according  to  knowl- 
edge, the  fact  remains  that  from  the  first  a  great  system 
of  prediction  has  entered  into  the  fabric  of  the  redempt- 
ive revelation,  and  that  so  far  as  history  has  advanced  it 
has  verified  by  its  fulfilments  the  truth  of  the  things  pre- 
dicted. And  as  the  world  moves  on,  and  the  history  of 
the  world  is  made,  doubtless  there  will  be  new  and  still 
stronger  evidences  derived  from  this  source. 

6.  We  know  a  cause  through  its  effects.  The  practical  ar- 
gument, among  the  external  proofs,  for  Christianity  is  what 
it  has  accomplished.  We  may  consider  what  it  has  done 
for  individuals  and  what  it  has  done  for  the  Avorld.  One 
of  the  most  telling  evidences  of  its  truth  is  in  the  change 
of  individual  hearts  and  lives.  It  does  transform  men. 
The  fact  is  undeniable.  Even  if  it  is  an  imagination,  it  is 
an  imagination  that  has  the  power  to  make  new  men.  It 
shows  itself  in  the  life.  It  has  its  root  in  faith  but  the 
tree  and  the  fruit  are  right  character  and  good  works. 
Said  one  of  the  early  churcli  Fathers  (Athenagoras,  "  A 
Plea  for  the  Christians,"  ch.  xi.) : 


THE   EVIDENCES   OF   CHRISTIANITY  53 

"  Among  us  you  will  find  uneducated  persons,  and  arti- 
sans, and  old  women,  who,  if  they  are  unable  in  words  to 
prove  the  benefit  of  our  doctrine,  yet  by  their  deeds  ex- 
hibit the  benefit  arising  from  their  persuasion  of  its  truth  ; 
they  do  not  rehearse  speeches,  but  exhibit  good  works  ; 
when  struck,  they  do  not  strike  again  ;  when  robbed,  they 
do  not  go  to  law  ;  they  give  to  those  that  ask  of  them,  and 
love  their  neighbors  as  themselves." 

It  is  probable  that  the  majority  of  those  wdio  become 
Christians  in  the  stricter  sense  of  the  term  have  been  first 
impressed  and  attracted  to  Christianity  by  the  godly  lives 
of  believers,  fathers,  mothers,  friends,  people  the  reality  of 
whose  faith  they  could  not  doubt  because  it  manifested  it- 
self in  the  life. 

But  the  argument  may  be  drawn  not  only  from  the  ef- 
fect of  the  Christian  religion  upon  individuals,  but  also 
from  its  effect  upon  the  world.  Our  Saviour  declared 
that  the  establishment  of  the  kingdom  was  to  be  a  grad- 
ual process,  which  he  illustrated  by  the  analogy  of  the 
leaven  in  the  mass  of  dough  and  the  growth  of  the  plant 
from  the  seed.  ISTow  so  far  as  human  history  has  ad- 
vanced, the  kingdom  of  God  has  steadily  advanced,  trans- 
forming the  world  in  its  progress.  First,  there  is  the 
spread  of  Christianity.  This  is  not  the  highest  form  of 
the  argument,  for  mere  numbers  and  territorial  extent  do 
not  prove  the  truth  of  religion  ;  yet  it  is  not  without  its 
value  when  rightly  stated.  The  few  disciples  gathered 
about  Jesus  at  the  time  of  his  death  had  increased  by 
the  end  of  the  first  century  to  500,000 ;  by  the  end  of 
the  second  to  2,000,000  ;  by  the  end  of  the  third  to 
5,000,000;  by  the  end  of  the  fourth  to  10,000,000;  at 
the  close  of  the  tenth  to  50,000,000 ;  at  the  close  of  the 
fifteenth  to  100,000,000  ;  until  in  the  year  1880  the  whole 
number  of  Christians  was  reckoned  at  410,900,000  (Dor- 
chester's "Problem  of  Religious  Progress,"  p.  515 ;  Fisher, 
in  his  "  History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  p.  580,  places 


54  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

the  iiimiber  at  the  present  time  somewhat  lower,  namely, 
388,000,000).  Thus  about  a  third  of  the  race  have  be- 
come at  least  nominally  Christian.  The  value  of  these 
numbers  is  increased  when  we  remember  the  obstacles 
Christianity  had  to  encounter,  especially  at  the  outset, 
that  it  went  directly  counter  in  its  teachings  to  the  natu- 
ral inclinations  of  men,  that  it  was  despised  and  ridiculed 
by  the  more  intelligent  classes,  that  the  means  employed 
were  purely  spiritual.  In  later  times  both  the  forms  and 
the  methods  of  Christianity  became  to  a  large  extent 
worldly,  but  probably  the  change  proved  a  hindrance 
rather  than  a  help  to  the  progress  of  the  Christian  religion. 
But  even  when  all  abatement  has  been  made  for  the  cor- 
rupt influences  which  have  invaded  it,  the  steady  advance 
of  the  religion  of  the  Cross  is  the  great  wonder  of  history. 
Other  religions  have  had  their  periods  of  success,  but  none 
has  shown  this  sure  and  steady  growth  and  this  ability  to 
hold  its  own  in  spite  of  all  opposing  influences. 

The  argument  becomes  far  stronger  Avlien  we  pass  from 
the  numbers  to  the  transforming  effects  of  Christianity. 
The  kingdom  of  God  has  been  coming  with  steady  prog- 
ress since  the  Holy  Spirit  was  given  on  the  day  of  Pen- 
tecost and  as  steadily  it  has  changed  the  moral  aspect  of 
the  world.  It  has  come  without  observation,  working 
from  within  outward,  as  a  spiritual  principle,  first  reno- 
vating the  hearts  of  men,  then  regenerating  society.  To 
its  influence  we  owe  the  wonderful  moral  change  the 
world  has  undergone  since  the  days  of  classical  heathen- 
ism. Christianity  has  brought  about  the  general  recogni- 
tion of  the  dignity  and  worth  of  manhood.  It  has  ef- 
fected the  gradual  abolition  of  slavery.  It  has  secured 
the  amelioration  of  legal  systems.  It  has  elevated  wom- 
an, created  the  Christian  family,  given  to  the  world  the 
blessings  of  the  Christian  home,  asserted  the  rights  of 
children.  To  it  we  are  indebted  for  our  institutions  of 
charity.     Christianity  has  been  the  motive  power  in  the 


THE   EVIDENCES   OF   CHRISTIAlSriTY  55 

overthrow  of  class  distinctions.  In  religion  it  has,  after 
many  struggles,  secured  to  men  the  right  of  private  judg- 
ment in  matters  of  conscience,  a  i-ight  which  the  hierar- 
chical churches  still  resist,  but  which  they  are  powerless 
permanently  to  withhold.  It  has  established  new  methods 
in  politics  and  government,  and  is  destined  to  exert  a  still 
greater  influence  upon  them  in  the  future.  It  has  brought 
about,  in  a  measure  at  least,  the  recognition  of  the 
brotherhood  of  nations,  and  we  know  that  the  time  must 
come,  sooner  or  later,  when  under  its  benign  influence 
men  will  beat  their  spears  into  pruning-hooks  and  nations 
learn  war  no  more.  Nor  shall  we  forget,  in  this  survey  of 
the  triumphs  of  Christianity,  that  the  greatest  intellectual, 
social,  and  moral  movement  of  modern  times,  the  Prot- 
estant Keformation,  began  in  a  revival  of  faith  in  Jesus 
Christ. 

And  then,  consider  the  present  power  of  Christianity. 
We  have  but  to  compare  the  Christian  and  the  heathen 
nations,  or  the  nations  in  which  the  Christian  faith  exists 
in  its  purity  and  those  in  which  it  has  become  corrupted, 
to  see  how  great  and  beneficent  is  the  influence  of  Chris- 
tianity. The  presence  or  absence  of  Christianity  means 
the  presence  or  absence  of  civilization  in  the  highest  sense 
of  the  term.  Compare  England  and  Germany  with 
Turkey  and  China.  See  what  the  labors  of  Christian 
missionaries  have  accomplished  in  the  civilization  of  the 
islands  of  the  Pacific.  Consider  the  way  in  which  the  civ- 
ilization of  Christian  countries  differs  according  to  the 
purity  or  degeneracy  of  their  faith,  tlie  difference  between 
England  and  Spain,  between  Protestant  and  Roman  Catho- 
lic Canada.  Is  it  said  that  civilization  is  the  cause  rather 
than  the  effect,  that  when  Christianity  has  finished  its  work, 
civilization  will  exist  without  it?  Then  look  at  the  at- 
tempts that  have  been  made  to  retain  civilization  without 
Christianity,  at  France  during  the  Revolution,  at  Paris 
when  the  Commune  had  possession  of  it  in  1871.     Of  all 


56  PEESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

villains  the  civilized  is  the  worst.  Doubtless  civilization 
can  exist  for  a  time  without  Christianity.  The  better 
educated  classes,  which  have  received  a  Christian  training 
and  a  Christian  morality,  can  cast  aside  Christ,  and  play- 
ing with  a  superficial  culture  and  a  more  superficial  phil- 
osophy call  it  religion  or  even  an  improvement  upon  relig- 
ion. But  take  away  the  religion  of  the  masses,  and  will 
they  retain  morality  and  phihinthropy,  and  respect  for  gov- 
ernment ?  No,  close  upon  the  heels  of  the  agnosticism  of 
our  times  come  nihilism,  and  atheism,  ready  to  overthrow 
religion,  morality,  government,  and  all  the  sanctions  by 
which  the  perpetuity  and  well-being  of  society  are  main- 
tained. 

As  we  look  out  over  the  M-orld  and  see  the  great  forward 
movement  in  every  department  of  human  effort  which 
chai'acterizes  our  age,  we  discover  that  the  work  is  being 
done  chiefly  by  a  few  nations.  What  are  the  nations  that 
exert  this  regenerating  power  ?  The  three  great  Protes- 
tant nations,  England,  Germany,  and  the  United  States. 
Can  we  doubt  that  their  influence  and  success  is  due  to 
the  religion  of  Jesus  ?  To  them,  if  they  are  true  to  Christ, 
belongs  the  future  of  mankind.  They,  like  Israel  of  old, 
are  Chosen  Peoples.  Let  them  realize  the  mission  that 
has  been  connnitted  to  them,  let  them  seek  to  build  up 
the  kingdom  of  God,  and  the  day  of  the  woi-ld's  redemp- 
tion will  speedilj^  come.  Let  them  be  untrue  to  the  task 
God  lias  given  them  to  do,  and  He  will  give  to  other  na- 
tions worthier  of  it  the  privilege  of  carrying  to  its  success- 
ful completion  God's  plan  for  the  uplifting  and  renova- 
tion of  the  race. 

Such,  then,  in  brief  outline,  are  tlie  evidences  of  Chris- 
tianity, the  grounds  of  the  Christian's  faith.  We  do  not 
accept  with  credulity  a  system  imposed  upon  us  by  our 
fellow-men.  We  do  not  follow  our  feelings  or  our  imagi- 
nation. We  believe  because  we  find  in  our  faith  the 
highest  reason.     AVe  look  within,  and  there  is  an  experi- 


THE   EVIDENCES   OF   CHRISTIANITY  57 

ence  of  God's  presence  and  power,  and  of  the  grace  of 
Christ,  the  reality  of  which  we  cannot  doubt.  We  look 
without,  and  we  discover  in  what  the  religion  of  redemp- 
tion has  accomplished  the  evidence  of  its  truth.  And 
when  those  who  are  not  Christians  doubt,  we  ask  them 
only  to  deal  with  this  subject  as  honestly  as  they  would 
with  any  other,  and  to  subject  it  to  as  reasonable  tests. 
He  who  asks  will  receive ;  he  who  seeks  will  find  ;  to  him 
who  knocks  it  will  be  opened. 


lY. 

THE    MEANING    OP    THE    MUIACLES 

John  in  prison  had  fallen  into  momentary  doubt  as  to 
the  messiahship  of  Jesus.  Accordingly,  he  sent  two  of 
his  disciples  to  the  Master  with  the  question,  "Art  thou 
he  that  should  come,  or  do  we  look  for  another  ?  "  The 
answer  was,  "  Go  and  show  John  again  those  things  which 
ye  do  hear  and  see :  the  blind  receive  their  sight,  and  the 
lame  walk,  the  lepers  are  cleansed,  and  the  deaf  hear,  the 
dead  are  raised  up,  and  the  poor  have  the  gospel  preached 
to  them"  (Matt.  xi.  4,  5).  The  proof  which  Jesus  had  to 
furnish  was  twofold,  his  words  and  his  works,  his  gospel 
and  his  miracles.  If  these  bore  upon  them  the  sure  marks 
of  their  divine  origin,  then  but  one  conclusion  was  pos- 
sible, that  Jesus  was  the  Christ. 

In  our  own  times  one  half  of  this  evidence  is  widely  dis- 
credited. The  miracles  are  felt  by  many  to  be  a  burden 
rather  than  a  help  to  Christianity.  Popular  scepticism 
directs  its  most  successful  assaults  against  the  miraculous 
element  in  the  Christian  system.  It  must  be  confessed 
that  even  the  defenders  of  Christianity  show  a  certain 
timidity  in  dealing  with  the  subject.  Partly  this  is  the 
result  of  an  undue  emphasis  laid  upon  the  miracles  in  the 
evidences  of  Christianity,  which  has  brought  about  its  in- 
evitable reaction.  But  still  more  it  is  the  result  of  a  mis- 
understanding of  what  miracles  are.  They  have  been 
regarded  too  much  as  mere  acts  of  power,  designed  to 
arouse  wonder  and  thus  perforce  to  compel  belief  in  the 
divine  mission  of  prophets  and  apostles  and  the  Christ 


THE  MEANING   OF   THE   MIRACLES  59 

himself.  The  moral  and  spiritual  meaning,  which  belongs 
intrinsically  to  them,  has  not  been  sufficiently  perceived, 
nor  has  their  organic  connection  with  God's  great  work 
of  revelation  and  redemption.  If  the  reality  of  the  mir- 
acles is  made  to  rest  upon  mere  testimony,  even  though  it 
be  the  testimony  of  the  best  and  most  self-sacrificing  of 
men,  the  task  of  vindicating  them  must  always  be  most 
difficult,  so  that  by  the  time  we  have  made  out  a  fair  case 
for  them,  they  have  become  of  but  little  use  in  the  evi- 
dences of  Christianity.  But  if  we  can  show  that  the  mir- 
acles are  part  and  parcel  of  God's  redemptive  revelation 
itself,  that  they  are  in  their  moral  character  as  expressive 
of  God's  grace  as  any  words  uttered  by  inspired  lips,  that 
they  reveal  truths  that  no  mere  words  could  make  known, 
in  a  word,  that  revelation  and  redemption  would  be  im- 
perfect and  maimed  without  miracles — then  the  work  of 
proving  their  reality  becomes  comparatively  easy  and  their 
use  in  the  proof  of  Christianity  invaluable. 

It  is  my  purpose  to  show,  so  far  as  1  can  in  a  single 
chapter,  what  is  the  true  meaning  of  the  scriptural  miracles 
and  the  place  they  occupy  in  the  Christian  system.  I  am 
sure  that,  even  though  I  should  succeed  only  in  part,  there 
are  some  who  will  be  helped  and  strengthened  in  their 
faith  by  a  fuller  understanding  of  this  difficult  subject. 

I.  In  the  first  place,  the  miracles  presuppose  the  dis- 
turbance of  the  order  of  physical  nature  by  sin.  That 
there  is  such  a  disturbance  every  thoughtful  person  must 
admit,  whether  he  looks  for  knowledge  on  the  subject  to 
the  teachings  of  scripture  or  the  facts  of  experience.  We 
do  not  stand  in  our  true  relation  to  the  world  about  us. 
Man  was  made  to  have  dominion  over  nature.  That  is 
the  truth  the  Bible  declares  upon  its  first  page.  It  is  the 
truth  prophesied  by  the  evolution  of  the  lower  orders  of 
being  in  the  earlier  history  of  the  world.  It  is  the  truth 
borne  in  upon  us  by  all  our  observation  of  the  M'orld  as  it 
is  to-day. 


60  PKESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

To  begin  with  what  is  nearest  to  us :  in  the  true  relation 
of  things  our  souls  should  have  dominion  over  our  bodies. 
The  body  was  meant  to  be  the  obedient  organ  of  the 
spirit.  Nothing  could  be  more  striking  than  the  differ- 
ence between  the  animal  and  man  in  this  respect.  AVith- 
out  denying  the  reality,  within  certain  limits,  of  animal 
intelligerice,  yet  it  is  evident  that  instinct  or  inherited 
habit  has  a  far  larger  influence  in  the  bodily  actions  of 
the  animal.  The  new-born  calf  or  colt  is  to  a  great  extent 
already  in  possession  of  the  bodily  activities  which  it  is  to 
use  in  after  life.  It  has  no  infancy  and  but  a  very  short 
childhood.  It  has  but  little  to  learn  and  it  learns  it 
quickly.  But  in  the  case  of  man  how  different.  How 
enormous  is  the  change  from  the  utter  helplessness  of  in- 
fancy to  the  full  activity  of  maturity.  And  the  whole 
process  of  education,  by  which  the  mature  state  is  at- 
tained, is  a  continuous  process  of  the  mastery  of  the  soul 
over  the  body.  An  animal  walks  at  birth.  A  child  learns 
to  walk,  gaining  by  slow  degrees  the  power  to  use  its  mus- 
cles and  limbs.  Still  more  complicated  and  difiicult  is  the 
learning  to  talk  and  the  learning  to  think  connected  with 
it.  We  do  not  see  how  the  brain  is  slowly  exercised  to 
its  work,  by  what  processes  its  delicate  machinery  is  put 
into  gear  and  trained  to  work.  But  the  slightest  consid- 
eration suffices  to  give  us  an  inkling  of  the  wonderful  truth. 
Nor  is  it  needful  to  do  more  than  allude  to  the  equally 
marvellous  processes  by  which  the  bodily  dexterities  of 
later  life  are  attained.  Watch  once  the  practised  fingers 
of  the  nnisician  as  they  fly  over  the  keys,  and  think  of  the 
master}'  of  the  mind  over  the  body  thus  manifested.  There 
is  no  limit  to  the  possible  power  of  our  free  wills  over  the 
physical  organisms  associated  with  them.  And  undoubted- 
ly it  was  meant  that  the  control  should  be  perfect,  that 
our  bodies  should  become  in  all  things  the  willing  instru- 
ments of  our  spirits,  and  especially  that  they  should  carry 
out  the  behests  of  souls  devoted  to  holy  ends. 


THE  MEANING   OF   THE   MIRACLES  61 

But  how  far  is  the  actiical  from  the  ideal !  Our  bodies 
are  not  and  never  become  what  they  were  meant  to  be. 
Sinful  influences,  running  through  long  lines  of  ancestry 
to  our  first  parents,  have  impaired  our  physical  constitu- 
tion. "We  come  into  the  world  disordered,  born  to  weak- 
ness, sickness,  and  death.  In  every  pain  we  bear,  in  ev- 
ery failure  of  our  physical  powers  by  which  we  are  hin- 
dered in  our  work,  in  the  sensitiveness  and  irritability 
which  turn  the  harmony  of  body  and  soul  into  discord, 
we  have  the  witness  to  the  confusion  sin  has  wrought. 
Still  more  in  death.  Death  is  not  natural.  It  is  the  one 
unnatural,  utterly  unnatural  experience  of  the  world. 
Christianity  may  take  away  even  now  its  sting.  Christ's 
redemption  may  even  throw  a  glory  around  death  as  the 
entrance  into  the  heavenly  blessedness.  But  nntil  the  res- 
urrection day  brings  the  final  conquest  over  death,  it  will 
be  the  great  evidence  of  the  confusion  sin  has  wrought 
in  nature.  For  man  was  not  made  to  die.  Death,  that 
to  the  brute  is  natural,  is  to  man  the  subversion  of  his 
true  destination.  It  is  the  superficial  sentiment  of  popu- 
lar religion  that  tries  to  comfort  the  mother  who  has  laid 
away  in  the  grave  the  precious  body  of  her  child  by  tell- 
ing her  that  death  is  beautiful.  The  Bible  never  repre- 
sents it  so. 

Infirmity,  disease,  death  come  to  us  as  the  result  of 
others'  sin,  the  corporate  sin  of  the  world,  in  the  conse- 
quences of  which  we  all  participate.  But  our  own  sin 
produces  the  same  result,  adding  to  the  heritage  of  disor- 
der into  which  we  are  born.  How  many  there  are  who 
with  bodies  weakened,  strength  gone,  ability  for  useful 
work  crippled,  life  fast  ebbing,  must  confess  that  their 
own  sin  has  made  it  so. 

And  it  is  not  only  in  our  relation  to  our  bodies  that  the 
disorder  which  sin  has  brought  into  the  world  is  manifest. 
Sin  has  disturbed  man's  relation  to  external  nature.  On 
the  broad  scale  of  the  world's  life  this  is  manifest  enough. 


62  PRESENT   DAY    THEOLOGY 

The  pride,  the  avarice,  the  cruelty  of  man  have  turned 
many  of  earth's  most  lovely  regions  into  a  desert.  War 
with  its  devastation  has  altered  the  very  climate  of  the 
regions  over  which  it  has  swept.  Think  how  the  selfish 
greed  for  wealth — and  that  is  merely  one  of  the  manifes- 
tations of  sin — is  to-day  cutting  down  our  forests,  im- 
poverishing our  soil,  filling  up  our  rivers  and  harbors. 
Sin  has  turned  man's  relation  to  the  animal  creation, 
which  should  be  a  relation  of  protection  and  friendship, 
into  a  relation  of  enmity  and  tyranny.  How  little  we 
think  of  destroying  a  whole  race  of  song-birds  to  gratify 
the  pride  of  a  foolish  fashion  !  And  what  is  true  of  men 
in  the  large  is  true  of  us  as  individuals.  Nature,  which 
was  made  to  be  our  friend,  which  ought  to  be  the  willing 
and  obedient  servant  of  a  holy  will,  is  treated  as  our 
enemy.  We  fear  her.  We  oppress  her.  We  turn  from 
her.  How  we  huddle  ourselves  together  in  cities  and 
banish  from  us  every  vestige  of  nature  as  God  has  made  it. 
How  we  shut  ourselves  np  in  dark  houses  and  stew  our- 
selves with  unnatural  heat.  Anything  rather  than  to  let 
God's  bright  sunshine  tinge  our  cheeks  with  its  glow  or 
God's  pure  air  fill  our  lungs  and  send  the  warm  blood  ting- 
ling through  our  veins. 

It  is  sin  that  crowds  the  poor  together  in  narrow  alleys 
and  festering  tenement-houses.  It  is  sin  that  feeds  them 
with  poisoned  food.  And  because  man  has  fallen  out 
with  nature,  nature  has  her  revenge.  She  torments  us 
with  her  tempests  and  floods  and  droughts.  She  kills  us 
with  her  miasma  and  her  cholera.  She  fills  our  cities  with 
discomforts  and  distresses.  She  hides  her  brighter  aspects 
from  us.  Longfellow  tells  us  in  melodious  verse  of  the 
naturalist  Agassiz,  how 

"  He  wandered  away  and  away 

With  Nature,  the  dear  old  nurse, 
Who  sang  to  him  night  and  day 
The  rhynaes  of  the  universe. 


TJIE   MEANING   OF   THE  MIRACLES  63 

And  whenever  the  way  seemed  long, 

Or  bis  heart  began  to  fail, 
She  would  sing  a  more  wonderful  song. 

Or  tell  a  more  marvellous  tale." 

That  is  the  way  it  ought  to  be  with  us  all.  But  how  few 
are  on  such  terms  with  nature  !  For  the  great  mass  of 
the  race  it  is  far  different.  Even  those  whose  life  is 
spent  in  outdoor  labor,  in  the  open  field,  still  realize  the 
primeval  curse  of  sin,  the  most  of  them  wringing  with 
weary  labor  and  sweat  of  brow  only  a  scanty  livelihood 
from  a  reluctant  soil. 

II.  In  the  second  place,  a  miracle  is  a  divine  restora- 
tion of  the  true  order  of  nature.  The  old  definition  of 
miracles,  which  was  accepted  by  friends  and  pointed  the 
attacks  of  enemies,  was  that  it  was  a  violation  or  suspen- 
sion of  the  order  of  nature.  Now  there  is  a  measure  of 
truth  in  this  definition.  A  miracle  does  break  in  upon 
the  order  of  nature  to  which  we  are  accustomed.  It  is 
the  result  of  the  immediate  operation  of  the  First  Cause. 
It  produces  effects  which  are  extraordinary  and  inexplica- 
ble upon  the  common  principles  of  physical  science.  But 
if  the  facts  which  have  been  already  brought  forward  are 
true,  then  the  common  order  of  nature  is  not  the  true 
order  of  nature.  In  our  common  experience  of  nature 
we  do  not  see  it  in  its  true  character.  In  many  respects, 
indeed,  the  world  is  what  it  was  when  God  first  made  it. 
Matter,  energy,  with  their  properties  and  laws,  remain  un- 
changed. So  far  as  the  world  is  uninfluenced  by  man,  it 
goes  on  just  as  it  did  ten  thousand  or  a  million  years  ago. 
But  where  man  has  come  into  contact  with  nature  and 
human  sin  has  spread  its  blight,  a  false  order  of  nature 
has  entered.  Now  it  is  just  here  that  the  miracle  has  its 
sphere.  Elsewhere  God  continues  to  work  through  His 
ordinary  Providence  by  means  of  second  causes.  But 
here  His  power  is  put  forth  directly  to  correct  what  has 
become  disarranged.     The  miracle  consists  not  so  much 


64  PKESENT   DAY    THEOLOGY 

ill  the  immediate  interposition  of  God.  Indeed,  the  dis- 
tinction between  the  mediate  and  the  immediate,  the  in- 
direct and  the  direct  working  of  God  is  one  of  man's 
making,  and  it  is  donbtful  whether  it  has  any  real  mean- 
ing except  in  our  thought.  But  whether  the  distinction 
be  important  or  not,  it  is  not  so  much  the  divine  interpo- 
sition as  the  correction  of  the  disturbed  course  of  nature 
which  constitutes  the  miracle. 

The  truth  of  this  position  becomes  obvious  when  we 
examine  the  miracles  recorded  in  the  Bible.  This,  and 
this  alone,  gives  them  an  adequate  explanation.  Take, 
first,  the  miracles  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  most  of 
them  fall  into  two  great  groups,  the  miracles  of  the  Exo- 
dus and  the  miracles  of  the  two  great  prophets  Elijah 
and  Elisha.  The  first  group  is  composed  of  the  ten 
plagues  by  which  the  Egyptians  were  brought  to  let  the 
Israelites  go  out  of  their  bondage.  These  were  miracles 
of  judgment  and  mark  the  lowest  stage  among  the  Biblical 
miracles.  They  were  all  miracles  in  external  nature.  It 
is  said  by  one  of  the  most  eminent  of  modern  Old  Testa- 
ment scholars  (Oehler's  "  Old  Testament  Theology,"  Am. 
trans.,  p.  70)  that  "  the  order  of  their  succession  stands  in 
close  connection  with  the  natural  course  of  the  Egyptian 
year  from  the  time  of  the  first  swelling  of  the  Kile,  which 
generally  happens  in  June,  to  the  spring  of  the  following 
year."  Now  what  was  the  character  of  these  miracles? 
how  were  they  restorations  of  the  true  order  of  nature  ? 
The  answer  is  obvious.  In  the  primitive  constitution  of 
nature,  the  natural  forces  work  together  for  the  punish- 
ment of  sin.  They  do  so  to  a  certain  extent  even  now. 
Many  sins  are  avenged  by  nature.  But  more  are  not. 
As  things  are,  so  great  has  the  disorder  become  that  in 
very  many  cases  these  forces  work  in  the  interests  of  sin. 
Men  like  Rameses  II.  in  ancient  times,  and  Napoleon  in 
modern  times,  so  far  avail  themselves  of  the  resources 
of  science,  by  which  nature  is  brought  under  the  con- 


THE   MEANING   OF   THE   MIRACLES  65 

trol  of  man,  that  thej  employ  the  powers  of  nature  in 
tlie  interest  of  their  greed  or  tyranny  or  hist.  But 
these  great  plagues  were  a  divine  restoration  of  the  pow- 
ers of  nature  for  the  time  being  to  their  true  use,  to 
punish  crime  and  to  uphold  and  deliver  oppressed  inno- 
cence. 

In  the  second  group  of  Old  Testanaent  miracles  we  still 
find  miracles  of  judgment,  but  miracles  of  pure  mercy  be- 
gin to  be  mingled  with  them,  anticipations  of  God's  gra- 
cious revelation  in  the  New  Dispensation.  The  poor  and 
famishing  are  succored,  the  diseased  are  healed,  the  dead 
are  raised.  But  these  miracles  of  grace  and  mercy  find 
their  full  realization  in  the  miraculous  works  of  Christ. 
His  miracles  are  all  of  mercy.  The  two  which  seem  at 
first  to  be  of  a  different  character,  namely,  the  withering 
of  the  barren  fig-tree  and  the  permitting  of  the  demons  to 
enter  into  the  herd  of  swine,  are,  when  rightly  understood, 
no  exceptions.  The  larger  number  of  the  Saviour's  mira- 
cles are  restorations  of  those  disorders  of  nature  which 
have  befallen  the  human  body  through  sin.  The  rest,  such 
as  the  making  of  the  wine  at  the  wedding  of  Cana,  the 
walking  on  the  water,  the  feeding  of  the  hungrj'  multi- 
tudes, point  to  a  power  over  nature  which  man  is  to  have 
when  he  is  freed  from  the  dominion  of  sin  and  stands 
once  more  in  his  true  relation  to  nature. 

Let  us  look  for  a  moment  at  the  miracles  which  concern 
the  human  body.  We  know  but  little  in  these  days  of 
possession  by  demons.  The  malady  which  in  our  times 
comes  closest  to  it  is  insanity.  So  clear-headed  and 
broad-minded  a  man  as  Charles  Kingsley  has  left  on  rec- 
ord his  sober  belief  that  some  cases  of  madness  can  only 
be  explained  by  the  assumption  of  demoniac  possession. 
But  be  that  as  it  may,  in  the  time  of  Christ  the  powers 
of  evil  seem  to  have  gotten  possession  in  some  cases  of 
the  human  body.  It  was  one  of  the  effects  of  sin,  not 
necessarily  of  personal  sin,  often  probably  of  ancestral  sin. 


66  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

It  was  an  awful  token  of  the  humiliation  which  has  be- 
fallen man,  of  a  subjection  to  evil  through  his  physical 
nature  which  puts  him  on  a  lower  level  than  the  ani- 
mal. And  when  the  Saviour  spoke  the  word,  and  the 
demons  came  out,  leaving  the  poor  victim  once  more  sane 
and  well,  in  the  sphere  of  the  delivered  body  the  true 
order  of  nature  was  restored.  So  in  the  case  of  the  dis- 
eases which  the  Master  healed.  To  one  who  sees  the  world 
as  it  is  and  compares  it  with  what  it  might  be  and  what 
it  ought  to  be,  the  existence  of  disease  is  a  fearfully  sad 
fact.  Where  man  ought  to  stand  so  much  higher  than 
the  brute  he  stands  actually  lower.  For  disease  is  almost 
unknown  among  animals  except  as  they  have  come  under 
the  blighting  influence  of  human  sin.  But  when  the 
Saviour  came,  the  ravages  of  disease  were  staj'ed  and  the 
natural  order  was  restored.  The  blind  received  their 
sight,  the  lame  walked,  the  lepers  were  cleansed,  the  deaf 
heard.  What  a  moment  it  must  have  been  to  those  dis- 
eased ones  when  they  heard  the  Master's  quiet  words, 
"  Be  thou  clean  !  "  and  tho  blood  poured  gladly  thi'ough 
their  veins  in  all  the  glow  and  eagerness  of  perfect  health. 
And  then,  the  miracles  of  raising  from  the  dead.  Death 
seems  the  most  hopeless  of  all  tlie  evils  which  have  come 
in  the  train  of  sin.  The  phj'sician  may  heal  disease,  or 
even  nature  may  in  part  repair  her  own  work  of  evil. 
But  nature  and  physician  stand  alike  helpless  before 
death.  Yet  the  miracle  brings  back  nature  even  in  this 
extremity.  Christ  stands  before  the  sepulchre  and  calls, 
"  Lazarus,  come  forth  !  "  and  the  dead  man  appears  once 
more  alive  and  well.  In  one  home  at  least  the  rightful 
reign  of  life  is  re-established,  the  tears  of  sorrow  are  wiped 
away,  and  for  a  time  at  least  the  curse  of  sin  is  removed. 

Though  in  very  different  ways,  the  miracles  all  show 
themselves  to  be  a  restoration  of  the  true  order  of  nature, 
alike  the  miracles  of  judgment  and  the  miracles  of  mercy. 

III.   We  are  next  led  to  ask.  What  is  the  purpose  of  the 


I 


THE   MEANING   OF  THE   MIRACLES  67 

miracles  ?  The  answer  is,  It  is  to  reveal  God  as  the  God 
of  redemption.  They  are  a  constituent  and  most  necessary 
part  of  a  great  scheme  or  system  of  revelation  which  aims 
at  the  redemption  of  mankind  or  the  establishment  of 
God's  kingdom  in  a  world  of  sin.  This  redemption,  as  it 
is  described  in  the  Bible,  is  many-sided.  It  includes  far 
more  than  the  salvation  of  individual  souls  from  the  gnilt 
of  sin,  though  undoubtedly  that  is  in  many  respects  the 
most  essential  element  in  it.  But  it  includes  the  redemp- 
tion of  the  race  of  men  and  of  the  world  itself  from  all 
sin  and  all  the  consequences  of  sin,  even  to  the  carrying 
forward  of  the  race  and  the  world  to  that  goal  of  per- 
fected development  which  they  would  have  reached  had 
not  sin  entered  the  world.  If  we  could  once  grasp  in  our 
Christian  thought  the  largeness  of  this  scriptural  concep- 
tion of  redemption,  it  would  give  a  new  aspect  to  all  our 
Christian  work.  God's  kingdom  is  to  move  onward  until 
every  enemy  of  man  is  vanquished — guilt,  sin,  suffering, 
death,  Satan,  hell — and  what  of  sin  and  evil  remains  in- 
corrigible finally  excluded  from  the  redeemed  world. 

God's  revelation  of  redemption  was  from  the  first  two- 
fold, a  revelation  in  words  and  in  works.  The  words 
were  the  teachings  of  holy  men,  consecrated  and  inspired 
prophets,  culminating  in  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  The 
works  were  the  miracles  of  these  same  prophets  and  the 
culmination  of  the  miracles  in  the  wonderful  works  of 
Christ.  I  do  not  mean  that  there  were  not  other  works 
merely  providential.  But  the  miracles  were  the  essential 
part  of  the  revelation  in  works.  Now  in  this  system  of 
revelation  the  words  and  the  works  are  inseparably  united. 
The  revelation  would  not  be  complete  as  a  revelation  of 
redemption  if  either  element  were  absent.  We  should  not 
know  God  in  His  full  character  as  a  Redeemer  if  we  had 
merely  the  teachings  of  Moses  without  those  wonderful 
works  of  judgment  as  the  result  of  which  God  was 
enabled  to  lead  the  Children  of  Israel  out  of  Egypt  with 


68  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

a  high  Ijand.  We  should  not  know  Jesus  Christ  as  the 
personal  revelation  of  God,  as  the  God  manifest  in  the 
flesh,  unless  we  had  not  only  the  words  such  as  never  man 
spake,  but  also  his  gracious  miracles.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
those  who  reject  or  make  light  of  the  miracles  of  Christ 
always  reject  or  make  light  of  his  divinity.  In  their  in- 
trinsic nutui'e  the  miracles  are  a  revelation  of  God — not 
merely  of  Ilis  power,  but  also  of  His  holiness  and  His  love. 
They  stand  in  the  same  relation  to  the  revelation  in  words 
that  the  looks  and  gestures  and  touch  and  all  the  minis- 
tries of  outward  act  do  to  the  words  of  our  fellow-men. 
Christ  has  taught  us  as  much  of  the  love  of  God  bj^  his 
healing  of  the  palsied  man  as  John  has  by  all  three  of 
his  epistles.  The  miracle  of  the  wedding-feast  of  Cana 
was  a  visible  smile  of  God  upon  one  of  the  most  impor- 
tant and  tender  experiences  of  life.  The  healing  of 
Malchus's  ear  gives  us  a  deeper  insight  into  the  mind  of 
Christ  than  many  of  his  longest  discourses. 

It  was  doubtless  essential  to  the  purpose  of  the  miracles 
that  they  should  be  signs  pointing  from  outward  things 
to  inward  and  spiritual  realities.  There  is  such  a  corre- 
spondence, divinely  constituted,  between  the  physical  and 
the  spiritual  that  the  one  is  ever  the  symbol  of  the  other, 
Xature  furnishes  us  with  the  alphabet  by  which  we  read 
off  the  secrets  of  the  soul.  The  bodily  members  and  their 
functions  not  only  give  us  the  terms  by  which  we  describe 
the  invisible  operations  of  the  mind,  but  they  furnish  us 
with  analogies  by  which  alone  we  are  able  to  understand 
the  nature  and  workings  of  the  mind.  AVho  could  put 
into  thought  or  speech  the  idea  of  a  spiritual  joy  or  suffer- 
ing, if  there  were  not  bodily  pleasures  and  pains  with 
which  to  compare  it  ?  Or  could  we  hope  to  push  our  way 
through  the  intricate  mazes  of  metaphysics  if  we  had  not 
the  analogies  of  the  material  world  as  a  clue  to  guide  our 
ever}^  step  ?  So  in  the  miracles  there  was  a  symbolizing 
and  expression  of  spiritual  things.     The  phj^sical  disease 


THE   MEANING    OF   THE   MIRACLES  69 

was  the  sign  of  tlie  far  deeper  inner  disease  of  sin ;  the 
leprosy  of  tlie  body,  of  the  leprosy  of  the  soul.  The 
bodily  blindness  was  an  outward  token  of  the  spiritual 
blindness.  And  when  Christ  healed  these  diseases,  it  was 
a  sign  of  the  spiritual  healing — often,  indeed,  it  was  ac- 
companied by  the  spiritual  healing,  so  that  Christ  added 
to  the  words  of  comfort  for  the  body  the  medicine  for 
the  soul,  "  Thy  sins  be  forgiven  thee !  "  Indeed,  parallel 
with  the  outward  miracles  we  find  a  corresponding  series 
of  spiritual  miracles.  Blessed  he  who  had  the  insight  to 
see  the  latter  through  the  former.  Blessed  those  wlio  can 
do  so  now. 

But  our  reasoning  respecting  the  miracles  has  prepared 
us  to  find  a  further  meaning  in  them,  and  I  cannot  but 
think  that  it  was  their  chief  meaning.  They  were  pledges 
of  the  redemption  of  nature.  They  give  to  mankind  the 
assurance  that  the  disorder  into  which  the  course  of  nat- 
ure has  fallen  through  sin  is  at  last  to  be  fully  restored. 
They  are,  as  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  calls  them, 
"powers  of  the  world  to  come."  They  point  to  a  time 
when  nature  will  be  purged  from  all  the  effects  of  sin  and 
brought  into  her  true  relation  to  God  and  to  man.  That 
such  a  time  is  coming  the  scriptures  clearly  teach.  It  is 
a  part  of  that  consummation  of  all  things  which  is  associ- 
ated with  the  second  advent  of  our  Lord.  Glowing  pict- 
ures of  this  completion  of  redemption  in  the  physical 
world  are  given  in  the  Bevelation  of  St.  John.  We  read 
of  a  time  when  there  shall  be  "  a  new  heaven  and  a  new 
earth."  Then  "  God  shall  wipe  away  all  tears  from  their 
eyes ;  and  there  shall  be  no  more  death,  neither  sorrow, 
nor  crying,  neither  shall  there  be  any  more  pain."  Nor  is 
it  in  the  imagery  of  the  Apocalypse  alone  that  this  final 
state  is  described.  Paul  tells  us  that  "  the  last  enemy 
which  shall  be  destroyed  is  death,"  and  that  "  death  shall 
be  swallowed  up  in  victory."  He  tells  us  of  a  "  redemp- 
tion of  the  body."     He  declares  that  "  the  creation  itself 


70  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

also  shall  be  delivered  from  the  bondage  of  corruption." 
Peter  writes  of  "  new  heavens  and  a  new  earth,  wherein 
dwelleth  righteousness."  The  human  body  will  become  in 
that  glorious  resurrection  day  free  from  death,  from  sick- 
ness, from  weakness  and  from  pain,  the  perfect  instru- 
ment of  the  redeemed  spirit,  a  spiritual  body  perfectly 
adapted  to  a  spiritual  state.  Nature,  healed  of  all  her  dis- 
orders, will  be  brought  into  complete  subjection  to  man, 
and  through  man  to  God,  and  will  minister  at  once  to 
man's  holiness  and  his  happiness.  God's  kingdom  will  be 
established  alike  in  man  and  in  nature. 

Of  this  redemption  of  nature  the  miracles  are  an  antici- 
pation and  a  pledge.  They  are  outward  and  visible  illus- 
trations of  the  final  state.  They  furnish  to  all  who  can 
understand  their  meaning  an  undeniable  proof  of  the  cer- 
tainty and  completeness  of  God's  redemption.  They  are 
evidences  of  the  truth  of  Christianity  that  speak  for  them- 
selves. We  receive  them  as  we  receive  the  words  of 
Christ  and  the  Apostles,  not  so  much  because  we  can  ad- 
duce good  testimony  in  their  behalf  but  because  they 
carry  their  truth  written  plainly  upon  them.  Other  re- 
ligions lay  claim  to  miracles.  But  only  Christianity  gives 
mankind  such  miracles,  such  a  system  of  "powers  of  the 
world  to  come."  When  one  has  come  to  understand  them 
and  see  their  relation  to  the  whole  scheme  of  revelation, 
the  acceptance  of  them  raises  far  fewer  difficulties  than 
their  rejection.  It  is  as  easy  to  dispense  with  Christ's 
ethics  as  with  his  miracles. 

IV.  But  we  have  still  to  ask  the  question  why  miracles 
do  not  occur  at  the  present  time  ?  In  answering  the  ques- 
tion I  shall  take  it  for  granted  that  there  are  no  miracles 
now,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  their  continuance  is  claimed 
by  some  persons.  That  there  are  man}'  i-emarkable  cases 
of  bodily  healing  in  our  own  times  no  one  will  deny.  Few 
Christians  would  deny  that  in  many  cases  such  cures  have 
been  the  result  of  faith  and  prayer,  though  not  without 


THE   MEANING   OF   THE   MIRACLES  71 

the  use  of  natural  means.  But  true  miracles  there  are 
none.  Incurable  disease  is  not  cured.  Dead  men  are  not 
raised  from  the  dead.  Hungry  multitudes  are  not  fed 
with  a  few  loaves  and  fishes.  Nor  is  there  any  reason  to 
suppose  that  any  faith,  however  great,  would  to-day  bring 
about  such  results.  Why  is  this  ?  Is  not  human  need  as 
great  as  it  ever  was  ?  Is  not  God  as  merciful  ?  Is  there 
not  as  much  demand  for  outward  evidences  of  God's  pres- 
ence and  power? 

The  reason  why  the  miracles  have  ceased  may  be  briefly 
given.  It  is  for  the  same  reason  that  the  revelation  itself, 
as  a  supernatural  revelation,  ceased.  It  was  not  God's  pur- 
pose to  save  the  world  by  the  mere  exertion  of  His  own 
power,  but  by  the  slow,  protracted  process  of  moral  influ- 
ences. Men  could  not,  indeed,  save  themselves.  For  this 
they  had  neitlier  the  knowledge  nor  the  power.  And 
therefore  God  gave  them  a  supernatural  revelation,  and 
through  the  work  of  Christ  and  the  mission  of  the  Ploly 
Spirit,  has  established  in  the  world  a  system  of  redemptive 
agencies  by  means  of  which  men  may  be  saved.  But  He 
has  so  arranged  things  that  no  man  is  saved  except  by  his 
own  free  acceptance  of  the  divine  grace.  Nay  more.  He 
has  so  far  entrusted  men  with  the  ministry  of  the  divine 
grace  that  redemption  goes  forward  in  the  world  only  as 
men  carry  it  forward.  In  spite  of  all  the  immense  ma- 
chinery of  divine  redemptive  power  at  work  in  the  world, 
not  a  soul  would  be  bronglit  to  God  if  men  did  not  bestir 
themselves  to  carry  the  gospel  to  their  fellow-men.  This 
is  God's  method.  Thus,  and  in  no  other  way.  His  king- 
dom comes  and  His  will  is  made  to  be  done  on  earth. 

jSTow  in  this  method  of  God's  redemption  the  natural  is 
included.  The  disorder  of  nature  has  come  as  the  result 
of  sin,  the  natural  evil  as  the  result  of  the  spiritual  evil. 
The  restoration  or  redemption  of  nature  is  to  follow  the 
same  order.  It  will  come  as  the  result  of  increasing  right- 
eousness, the  redemption  of  nature  as  the  result  of  tlie 


72  PEESENT   DAY    TUEOLOGY 

spiritual  redemption.  And  from  tiie  nature  of  the  case 
tliis  must  be  a  slow  and  long-protracted  process.  For 
men  are  so  linked  together  through  heredity  and  in  their 
social  relations  that  the  spiritual  renovation  only  grad- 
ually effects  the  physical  renovation.  Yet  it  is  surely 
progressing  as  the  race  is  more  and  more  permeated  with 
the  Christian  life.  Disease  is  slowly  diminishing  as  men 
grow  better.  The  length  of  life  is  increasing.  The  prog- 
ress is  doubtless  slow  enough,  but  it  is  noiie  the  less  real. 
Christianity  is  teaching  men  a  new  conception  of  their 
duty  to  their  own  bodies  and  to  the  world  about  them. 
It  is  indeed  true  that  we  owe  the  advance  in  large  degiee 
to  civilization  and  science.  But  we  can  never  adequately 
explain  it  unless  we  bear  in  mind  that  it  is  Christian  civ- 
ilization and  Christian  science,  and  that  outside  of  the  in- 
fluence of  Christianity  civilization  and  science  have  ac- 
complished no  such  results.  Slowly  men  are  getting  their 
rightful  control  over  nature  and  using  their  dominion  to 
advance  the  welfare  of  the  individual  and  the  race.  And 
in  spite  of  the  man}^  abuses  and  injustices  that  prevail,  I 
do  not  doubt  that  under  the  influence  of  Christianity  the 
physical  well-being  and  happiness  of  men  is  steadily  in- 
creasing, from  century  to  century,  if  not  from  year  to 
year. 

We  are  prepared,  then,  to  understand  why  the  miracles 
were  not  continued.  It  was  not  needful  and  it  was  not 
best.  God  never  intended  thus  to  restore  tJie  disturbed 
order  of  nature.  But  a  few  sick  folk  were  healed  by 
Christ.  Scarcely  a  ripple  was  made  on  the  sea  of  human 
misery.  Only  here  and  there  an  unfortunate,  like  the 
blind  man  the  Saviour  healed,  was  selected,  that  the  works 
of  God  should  be  made  manifest  in  him.  What  was  in- 
tended was  to  give  men  by  a  few  striking  examples  the 
assui'ance  that  in  the  divine  redemption  all  nature  was 
included,  the  disordered  human  body  and  the  disordered 
world.     But  the  process  was  to  be  slow  and  by  the  opei-a- 


THE   MEANING   OF   THE   MIEACLES  78 

tion  of  natural  law,  and  the  consummation  was  to  be 
readied  only  in  the  world  to  come.  To  give  this  pledge, 
a  few  instances  were  all  that  were  needed.  It  was  enough 
that  men  should  perceive  the  powers  of  the  world  to 
come.  Nothing  would  have  been  gained,  so  far  as  God's 
purpose  was  concerned,  by  repeating  the  miracles  in  every 
age.  It  would  have  been  merely  to  make  them  common 
and  therefore  unmeaning.  It  would  have  been  as  need- 
less as  to  send  the  Master  or  the  apostles  in  every  age  to 
repeat  the  gospel  which  was  once  for  all  given  to  the 
world  in  that  first  age. 

Moreover,  it  is  far  better  for  us  that  the  miracles,  espe- 
cially the  miracles  of  healing,  should  not  continue.  As 
things  are  at  present,  the  disorder  of  nature  is  not  an  un- 
mixed evil.  It  is  the  check  which  God  has  placed  upon 
sin,  and  the  means  by  which  He  disciplines  men  in  holi- 
ness. The  chief  incentives  to  the  acceptance  of  God's 
grace  and  to  perseverance  in  His  service  come  from  the 
suffering  and  sickness  and  death  which  are  in  the  world. 
We  have  no  evidence  that  the  men  and  women  whom 
Christ  healed  when  he  was  on  earth  were  made  better 
Christians  than  those  upon  whom  he  performed  no  mira- 
cles. That  which  alone  has  intrinsic  value  in  the  world 
is  spiritual  health.  The  physical  well-being  is  of  use 
only  when  it  is  in  the  service  of  holiness.  And  as  things 
are,  it  is  better  that  men  should  suffer  and  better  that 
they  should  die.  It  is  better  that  they  should  through 
much  tribulation  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God.  Enough 
if  they  have  the  assurance  that  in  the  sequel,  when  all  sin 
shall  have  ceased,  all  suffering  and  sickness  and  death  and 
all  the  disorders  of  nature  shall  also  cease.  Enough  if, 
as  the  world  grows  better,  they  see  the  spiritual  redemp- 
tion slowly  but  surely  drawing  the  physical  redemption 
after  it. 

What,  then,  is  the  lesson  of  the  miracles  ?  It  is  a  lesson 
of  faith.     It  is  said  of  Christ  when  in  his  own  country 


74  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

that  he  did  not  many  mighty  works  there  because  of  their 
unbelief.  If  we  are  to  use  the  miracles  aright  we  must 
neither  distrust  their  reality  nor  be  credulous  as  to  their 
continuance.  What  is  needful  is  that  we  have  that  in- 
sight into  their  purpose  which  will  enable  us  to  see  their 
essential  place  in  God's  redemptive  revelation,  and  that 
sure  trust  in  God's  promise  which  will  make  us  certain  in 
all  the  darkness  of  this  world  of  the  final  and  glorious 
completeness  of  God's  redemption.  For  surely  God's 
kingdom  will  come  and  His  will  be  done  on  earth,  and  the 
earth  shall  be  His  once  more,  and  sorrow  and  sighing  shall 
flee  away. 


V. 

THE   HOLY  SCRIPTURES 

"When  Paul  spoke  of  the  Jewish  Scriptures  as  "  The 
holy  Scriptures,  which  ai'e  able  to  make  thee  wise  unto  sal- 
vation through  faith  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus  "  (2  Tim.  iii. 
15),  the  new  Testament  was  in  process  of  formation,  and 
no  one  at  that  time  imagined  that  it  was  to  take  its  place 
by  the  side  of  the  Old.  Yet  if  the  Apostle  had  realized 
what  was  to  come,  he  would  not  have  hesitated  to  use  the 
same  language,  with  even  stronger  emphasis,  of  the  whole 
Bible.  We  may,  then,  appropriately  employ  his  words  to 
introduce  the  subject  of  the  present  discussion — the  Holy 
Scripture  of  the  Christian  Church. 

I.  Our  first  inquiry  respects  the  nature  and  general 
characteristics  of  the  Bible.     What  manner  of  book  is  it  ? 

We  speak  of  it  as  a  book  or  the  Book.  But  in  reality 
it  is  not  a  single  book,  but  rather  a  whole  library.  It  is 
composed  of  sixty-six  different  books,  dealing  with  a  great 
variety  of  subjects,  and  emanating  from  different  periods. 
Of  these  books  the  first  thirty-nine  belong  to  the  history 
of  the  Jewish  nation  during  the  period  antecedent  to  the 
final  and  complete  loss  of  their  political  independence. 
They  are  written  in  Hebrew.  They  constitute  the  larger 
part  of  the  religious  literature  of  the  Jewish  people.  They 
are  sacred  books  at  the  present  time  to  both  the  Jews  and 
the  Christian  church.  The  other  twenty-seven  belong  to 
the  century  which  began  with  the  birth  of  Christ.  They 
are  written  in  Greek,  at  the  time  of  their  composition  the 
language  of  common  intercourse  among  the  different  races 


76  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

who  were  united  under  the  sway  of  the  Roman  Empire. 
These  books  are  peculiar  to  Christianity.  They  constitute 
the  major  part  of  the  religious  literature  of  the  apostolic 
church. 

But  the  Bible  is  not  a  mere  random  collection  of  ancient 
books.  Man}'  as  are  the  centuries  over  which  they  extend, 
widely  diverse  as  are  the  topics  they  discuss,  one  common 
subject  runs  like  a  golden  thread  through  them  all,  and 
binds  them  into  a  perfect  unity.  They  all  treat  in  some 
way  or  other  of  God's  redemptive  revelation,  and  of  the 
establishment  of  His  kingdom  in  the  world.  Some  deal 
with  the  revelation  in  its  historical  aspects.  Some  give 
us  the  divine  law,  and  exhibit  the  revelation  as  it  was  em- 
bodied in  the  institutions  of  the  Jewish  Theocracy.  Some 
record  the  inspired  messages  of  prophets  and  apostles. 
Some  reflect  the  pious  life  produced  by  the  redemptive 
revelation.  Others  still  describe  the  life  and  deeds  and 
teachings  of  the  incarnate  Word,  the  culmination  of  the 
divine  self -manifestation,  the  visible  presence  of  the  di- 
vine redemption.  Others  exhibit  the  first  triumphs  of 
the  kingdom  of  God  in  the  early  days  of  the  Christian 
church.  Others  disclose  the  future  of  i-edemption.  But 
all  are  connected  in  some  way  with  the  one  theme.  Or, 
since  Jesus  Christ  is  the  core  and  essence  of  the  redemp- 
tive revelation,  we  may  say  that  all  relate  to  him — the 
Old  Testament  books  typically  and  prophetically,  the  New 
directly. 

A  closer  examination  of  this  unity  amid  diversity — 
e plurihus  ummi — shows  that  it  is  an  organic  unity.  The 
Bible  is  an  organism.  It  is  one  of  the  great  services 
which  formal  philosophy  has  rendered  in  modern  times 
that  it  has  given  us  the  categoiy  of  the  organic  as  applied 
to  spiritual  things.  Strictly  speaking,  we  have  here  an 
analogy  rather  than  an  absolute  truth.  The  organism  be- 
longs, in  the  full  sense  of  the  term,  to  the  realm  of  non- 
sentient  life.     Unless  we  are  to  accept  the  view  which  has 


THE   HOLY   SCKIPTURES  77 

been  so  brilliantly  and  plausibly  pressed  npon  us  in  late 
years,  that  natural  law  is  identical  with  spiiitual  law,  we 
must  admit  as  much  as  this.  But  the  analogy  is  so  close 
and  so  luminous  that  we  may  take  it  almost  as  a  law.  Or 
j-ather,  we  may  say  that  it  is  only  in  the  light  of  this  anal- 
ogy that  we  can  fully  understand  the  similar,  though  in 
some  respects  different,  spiritual  law.  Now  an  organism  is 
a  whole,  pervaded  by  a  common  life,  of  which  the  parts  are 
reciprocally  means  and  ends,  and  work  together  for  a  com- 
mon end,  in  which  each  finds  its  fullest  meaning  and  real- 
ization. The  typical  example  is  the  human  body,  in  which 
all  the  members  work  for  the  well-being  of  the  whole. 
Paul  employs  this  analogy  with  great  power  in  describing 
the  functions  of  the  members  of  the  Christian  church  (1 
Cor.  xii.  12).  "  For  as  the  body  is  one,"  he  says,"  and  hath 
many  members,  and  all  the  members  of  that  one  body, 
being  many,  are  one  body  ;  so  also  is  Christ."  Mod- 
ern social  and  political  science  has  applied  the  analogy 
with  great  success  to  human  society,  the  body  politic. 
]^ow  it  is  this  analogy  which  best  explains  the  nature  of 
the  Bible  in  its  unity  and  diversity.  The  redemptive 
revelation  or  the  kingdom  of  God  gives  us  the  unity.  The 
different  books  all  stand  related  to  this  central  principle. 
Each  book  and  each  division  of  the  Bible  contributes  its 
share  to  the  common  end.  And  it  is  only  by  their  diver- 
sity that  we  have  that  wonderful  fulness  and  many-sided- 
ness which  are  so  characteristic  of  the  Bible.  Thus  the 
Old  Testament  gives  the  preparation  for  the  gospel  and 
the  New  the  fulfilment  in  Christ.  In  the  Old  Testament, 
as  the  old  saying  so  strikingly  puts  it,  the  New  lies  latent ; 
in  the  New  the  Old  lies  revealed  {^Tn  Vetere  Testamento 
Novum  latet  ',  in  Novo  Yetuspatet).  In  the  Old  we  have 
history,  law,  and  prophecy,  each  throwing  its  particular 
light  upon  the  common  facts.  In  the  New  Testament, 
gospels,  epistles,  the  history  of  the  Acts,  and  the  prophecy 
of  the  Apocalypse  bring  to  our  knowledge  the  divine  re- 


78  PRESENT   DAY    THEOLOGY 

demption,  each  from  a  different  point  of  view.  The  vahie 
of  our  fourfold  Gospel  has  been  often  remarked.  How 
much  more  we  know  of  Christ  because  we  can  change  our 
standpoint  from  the  Synoptics  to  John,  and  from  Matthew 
to  Mark  and  Luke  ! 

This  organic  relation  of  the  parts  of  the  Bible  also  fur- 
nishes us  with  a  standard  by  which  we  can  judge  their 
relative  importance.  In  one  way  of  looking  at  the  mat- 
tei-,  they  are  of  equal  importance,  because  all  are  in  some 
M-ay  contributoi-y  to  the  common  purpose.  Who  shall 
say  that  any  member  of  tlie  body  is  not  needful  ?  But  in 
another  way  of  regarding  the  matter,  they  are  of  varying 
importance.  "  The  eye  cannot  say  to  the  hand,  I  have  no 
need  of  thee :  nor  again,  tlie  head  to  the  feet,  I  have  no 
need  of  you  "  (1  Cor.  xii.  21).  And  yet  no  one  will  deny 
that  the  eye  may  become  more  important  than  the  hand ; 
and  certainly,  although  one  leads  a  maimed  and  imper- 
fect life  without  feet,  yet  life  is  possible  without  them, 
while  life  without  the  head  is  impossible.  So  we  rank 
the  books  of  the  Bible  according  to  the  closeness  of  their 
relation  to  that  redemptive  revelation  which  is  the  com- 
mon life  of  all.  The  Gospels  occupy  the  foremost  place. 
If  we  were  to  be  deprived  of  the  Bible  by  degrees, 
book  after  book,  we  should  doubtless  leave  them  to  the 
last,  for  they  are  the  head  and  heart,  the  vital  mem- 
bers of  the  scriptural  body.  They  give  us  the  essential 
facts  of  the  Christian  revelation.  On  this  pi-inciple  our 
missionaries  generally  begin  their  work  of  translating  the 
Bible  into  the  languages  of  the  heathen  to  whom  they 
minister  with  the  Gospels,  and  they  translate  the  New 
Testament  before  beginning  upon  the  Old.  In  like  man- 
ner they  commonly  take  first  in  the  Old  Testament  the 
Psalms,  in  which,  as  in  no  other  book,  the  revelation  of 
the  Old  Dispensation  is  summed  up  and  the  glories  of  the 
]^ew  anticipated.  So  we  judge  that  the  epistle  of  Paul 
to  the  Romans  is  of  more  importance  than  the  epistle  of 


THE   HOLY    SCEIPTURES  79 

James,  because  the  former  stands  in  more  direct  relation 
to  Christ  and  the  central  truths  of  the  Christian  revelation. 
On  this  principle  we  give  a  comparatively  low  place  in  the 
scale  of  importance  to  the  book  of  Esther,  in  which  the 
name  of  God  is  not  once  mentioned,  or  to  the  book  of 
Ecclesiastes.  Nevertheless,  while  there  is  this  difference 
in  relative  importance,  each  has  its  place.  The  book  of 
Esther  supplies  an  important  link  in  the  history  of  the 
kingdom  of  God.  Ecclesiastes  makes  clearer  to  us  the 
pi'oblems  and  perplexities  which  beset  religious  thought 
during  the  later  days  of  the  Old  Dispensation,  enabling 
us  to  better  understand  the  people  to  whom  the  redemp- 
tive revelation  came,  and  so  more  clearly  to  comprehend 
the  revelation  itself. 

We  are  thus  prepared  to  state  more  precisely  what  the 
Bible  is.  It  is  the  record  of  the  redemptive  revelation. 
It  is  not  the  revelation  itself.  It  is  not  sufficient  to  say 
that  it  contains  the  revelation.  It  is  the  authentic  docu- 
ment of  revelation,  the  written  reproduction  of  it.  The 
transfer  of  facts  and  truths  from  mind  to  mind  is  made 
by  language,  and  language  finds  its  permanent  form  in  the 
written  document.  The  redemptive  revelation,  as  we  have 
seen  in  a  former  chapter,  is  a  great  system  of  facts  and 
truths,  through  which  men  are  brought  to  the  personal 
experimental  knowledge  of  God,  as  the  God  of  grace. 
These  truths  and  facts  can  be  passed  over  from  those  who 
first  received  them,  and  experienced  the  revelation  of 
which  they  formed  a  part  to  others  only  by  language,  and 
if  they  are  to  be  preserved  for  all  ages  this  language  must 
find  written  form.  Indeed,  in  the  historical  process  of 
revelation  itself,  the  earlier  stages  could  be  preserved  and 
the  cumulative  effect  secured  only  in  this  way. 

But  the  definition  just  given,  while  it  truly  expresses 
the  nature  of  the  Bible,  is  too  meagre  to  suggest  the  rich- 
ness of  the  fact.  The  Bible  is  like  no  other  record  of 
facts  or  truths.     All  documents  and  books  enable  us  to  a 


80  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

certain  extent  to  live  into  and  ourselves  experience  the  life 
of  which  they  are  the  expression.  In  history,  in  poetry,  in 
philosophy,  in  the  fiction  that  is  true  to  life,  we  are  taken 
out  of  ourselves  and  made  partakers  of  the  thoughts  and 
experiences  of  other  persons,  and  it  may  be  other  ages. 
But  the  Bible  has  the  power,  as  no  other  book,  to  bring 
us  into  the  heart  of  its  subject.  It  is  the  mirror  of  reve- 
lation. It  is  almost  the  revelation  itself,  so  that  it  need 
not  be  a  matter  of  surprise  that  popular  thought  identifies 
it  with  the  revelation.  As  we  read  it,  we  live  the  sacred 
history  through.  God  is  manifested  to  us  in  supernatural 
ways,  as  to  the  holy  men  of  old.  We  sit  with  Abraham 
at  the  tent  door  as  the  heavenly  visitants  come  to  him. 
We  stand  with  Moses,  astounded,  before  the  bush  that 
burns  and  is  not  consumed.  The  woes  of  the  royal 
Psalmist  wring  our  souls.  We  behold  with  Isaiah  the 
glory  of  the  Lord  exalted  upon  His  throne,  and  the  angels 
veiling  their  faces  and  crying.  Holy,  holy,  holy.  Lord  God 
Almighty.  The  stern  denunciations  of  Jeremiah  sound 
like  a  clarion  call  in  our  ears.  We  walk  to  and  fro  with 
the  disciples  and  liear  the  Master's  words  and  see  his  won- 
derful works.  We  share  the  deep  thoughts  of  the  apos- 
tolic church  when  the  Spirit  descends  on  the  day  of  Pente- 
cost. And  if,  as  we  read,  our  hearts  are  open  to  receive 
the  blessed  influences  which  pervade  this  Book  of  books, 
we  discover  in  our  own  experience  the  same  Father,  the 
same  Saviour,  the  same  Holy  Spirit,  and  the  forgiveness 
and  strength  and  blessedness  of  their  redemption. 

II.  We  inquire,  in  the  next  place,  what  grounds  we 
have  for  accepting  the  Scriptures  as  the  autlientic  record 
of  the  redemptive  revelation.  Here  I  can  speak  only  in 
generalities.  The  subject  is  too  complex  for  me  to  follow 
it  into  its  details. 

The  Bible,  like  the  revelation  it  records,  has  been  a 
growth.  For  tlie  most  part  the  records  were  made  con- 
temporaneously with  the  events  to  which  they  relate.     All 


THE  HOLY    SCRIPTURES  81 

history  seeks  the  permanence  of  the  written  chronicle. 
Even  the  annals  of  the  earth's  changes  and  crises  before 
the  advent  of  man  have  been  preserved  in  the  strata  of 
its  rocks.  Human  history  makes  its  deep  impression  npon 
the  men  who  act  in  it  or  live  while  it  is  fresh  in  memory, 
and  they  are  impelled  to  commit  it  to  writing.  The  his- 
tory of  revelation,  even  though  no  divine  provision  had 
been  made  for  its  preservation,  must  needs  have  found  its 
chroniclers.  As  it  was,  the  same  God  who  made  the 
revelation  secured  its  recording  by  choosing  the  historians 
and  moving  them  to  undertake  the  work.  But  the  men 
themselves  seem  to  have  had  no  conception  of  the  great- 
ness and  far-reaching  importance  of  their  task.  "  They 
builded  better  than  they  knew."  Their  thoughts  were 
upon  the  present.  They  aimed  to  influence  their  contem- 
poraries or  their  immediate  successors.  Each  did  his  own 
particular  task,  availing  himself  of  the  occasion  that  pre- 
sented itself,  with  present  ends  in  view.  Then  when 
other  generations  had  come  upon  the  stage,  and  the  events 
and  facts  which  composed  the  revelation  had  become  in- 
distinct in  the  popular  memory,  these  old  records  of  God's 
dealings  with  men  became  precious  and  were  sacredly  pre- 
served. Thus  the  Canon,  or  collection  of  sacred  books, 
grew  up,  by  a  natural  process,  behind  and  in  which  we 
may  recognize  the  supernatural  working  of  the  God  of 
redemption,  guiding  both  the  individual  writers  and  the 
church  which  gathered  and  guarded  their  writings. 

We  owe  the  Old  Testament  in  its  present  form  particu- 
larly to  the  Jewish  church.  To  the  Jews  "  were  com- 
mitted the  oracles  of  God  "  (Rom.  iii.  2).  In  all  their  re- 
ligious and  political  vicissitudes  they  clung  to  the  sacred 
books  and  brought  them  into  the  unity  of  what  we  call 
the  Old  Testament.  The  collection  was  complete  in  the 
form  in  which  we  now  possess  it  at  the  time  of  Christ. 
We  have  not  only  the  testimony  of  our  Kew  Testament 
to  this  effect,  but  that  of  Josephus.     We  can  trace  it  still 


82  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

farther  back  through  the  apocryphal  book  of  Maccabees 
and  the  Septuagint  translation  into  the  Greek,  completed 
in  the  third  century  before  Christ.  Bnt  the  question  is 
asked,  Upon  what  grounds  did  the  Jews  admit  these  books 
into  the  Canon  ?  I  reply,  upon  weighty  grounds.  In  the 
first  place,  the  Jews  of  our  Saviour's  time  stood  in  the 
line  of  an  historical  tradition  running  back  to  the  begin- 
nings of  the  Hebrew  nation.  These  wi'itings  were  directly 
connected  with  that  historj-.  Many  of  their  authors  wei'e 
among  the  great  national  heroes.  Again,  these  books  all 
stood  in  a  direct  and  organic  connection  with  the  great 
system  of  redemptive  revelation,  upon  which  the  religious 
faith  and  institutions  were  founded.  Once  more,  these 
writings  disclosed,  as  thej^  do  to-day,  the  immediate  im- 
pression of  the  divine  Spirit  under  whose  influence  they 
were  composed.  I  do  not  assert  that  all  three  of  these 
tests  could  be  applied  to  every  book  of  the  Old  Testament, 
or  that  any  of  them  were  applied  in  a  scientific  way.  But 
they  do  seem  to  have  been  employed  in  such  a  way  as 
practically  to  accomplish  the  result.  And  here  I  may 
mention  the  fact  that  Christ  gave  his  sanction  to  our 
present  Old  Testament.  It  is  not  necessary  to  sup- 
pose, in  order  to  be  loyal  to  the  Saviour's  divinity,  that 
he  solved  all  the  problems  of  Biblical  criticism  by  mere 
omniscience. 

But  we  can  scarcely  suppose  that  he  who  was  himself 
the  perfect  revelation  of  God,  who  possessed  the  Spirit 
without  measure,  and  whose  religious  life  was  noui'ished 
by  the  stud}^  of  the  Old  Testament,  could  have  fallen  into 
any  serious  error  respecting  the  record  of  the  preparatory 
stages  of  the  revelation  which  culminated  in  himself.  In 
saying  this  I  do  not  mean  that  when  Jesus  speaks  of 
Moses  as  the  author  of  the  Law,  he  settled  the  difficult 
questions  respecting  the  authorship  of  the  Pentateuch. 
In  such  matters  he  may  have  merely  reflected  the  opinion 
of  his  contemporaries.     What  1  mean  is,  that  he  must 


THE    HOLY   SCRIPTUEES  83 

have  judged  with  practical  certainty  between  the  authen- 
tic record  of  revelation  and  extraneous  writings. 

The  early  Christians  accepted  the  Old  Testament  from 
tlie  Jews,  but  not  without  subjecting  it  to  tests  of  their 
own.  They  found  Christ  in  it.  They  knew  that  it 
was  able  to  make  them  "  wise  unto  salvation  through 
faith  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus"  (2  Tim.  iii.  15).  At  first 
it  was  their  only  Bible.  The  writings  wliich  compose 
our  present  New  Testament  came  into  existence  without 
observation  and  with  no  thought  on  the  part  of  their  au- 
thors that  they  were  forming  another  collection  of  sacred 
writings.  The  occasions  upon  which  they  were  written 
were  for  the  most  part  of  merely  local  importance.  Apos- 
tles and  apostolic  men  committed  to  writing  the  current 
stories  of  Christ's  words  and  works.  One  narrated  the 
history  of  the  early  church  and  the  missionary  work  of 
Peter  and  Paul.  Others  wrote  letters  of  counsel  and  in- 
struction, to  the  infant  churches.  Then,  when  the  genera- 
tions which  knew  the  apostles  and  the  first  work  of  the 
church  had  passed  off  the  stage,  and  it  became  needful 
to  have  an  authentic  record  of  the  Christian  revelation, 
these  books  were  gathered  and  added  to  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. And  here  again  the  grounds  upon  which  they 
were  admitted  to  the  Canon  were  strong  and  decisive. 
There  was  an  historical  tradition  whicli  traced  these  books 
directly  back  to  the  apostles  and  their  companions.  These 
were  the  books  which  stood  in  organic  connection  with  the 
revelation  itself.  In  them  the  spiritually-minded  Chris- 
tian recognized  the  presence  of  the  Spirit  of  God, 

Both  in  the  Old  Testament  and  the  ]^ew  there  were 
certain  books  which  were  for  a  time  in  doubt,  like  Ezekiel 
and  Ecclesiastes  in  the  former,  and  the  epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  and  the  Apocalypse  in  the  latter.  In  each  of 
these  cases  there  were  difficulties  in  the  way  of  an  imme- 
diate judgment.  But  ultimately  the  church  decided  to 
accept  them  on  the  ground  of  the  principles  to  which  ref- 


84  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

erence  lias  been  made.  So  the  clmrch  has  wavered  in  its 
attitude  toward  the  so-called  Apocrypha  both  of  the  Old 
Testament  and  the  New  ;  but  with  regard  to  these  books 
also  a  final  decision  was  reached  in  their  exclusion  from 
the  Biblical  Canon. 

But  it  must  not  be  supposed  that  we  accept  the  Bible 
to-day  upon  the  authority  of  the  church,  ancient  or 
modern.  Tliat  authority  has  its  weight,  as  it  ought  to 
have.  But  we  have  other  tests.  Christian  scholarship 
subjects  the  Bible,  as  a  whole  and  in  its  parts^  to  the  proof 
of  historical  and  literary  criticism,  and  shows  that  better 
grounds  can  be  given  for  the  acceptance  of  the  books  which 
compose  it  than  for  most  works  of  ancient  profane  lit- 
eratui'e.  I  do  not  say  that  Biblical  criticism  has  left  all 
our  old  notions  of  the  authorship  and  composition  of  the 
Biblical  books  undisturbed.  Thus,  to  take  a  single  in- 
stance, even  conservative  scholars  now  genei'allj'  admit 
that  the  Pentateutch  is  largely  made  up  of  eai-lier  docu- 
ments and  that  Moses  cannot  be  called  its  author  in  the 
original  sense  in  which  he  was  formerly'  supposed  to  be 
such.  But  Biblical  criticism  has  amply  sustained  the  au- 
thenticity of  the  Bible  as  a  whole  and  the  right  of  the 
individual  books  to  a  place  in  the  Canon.  Then  the 
Chi-istian  to-day  goes  to  the  Bible  with  a  personal  knowl- 
edge of  the  reality  of  the  revelation  it  records,  as  well  as 
of  the  results  it  has  accomplished  in  the  world,  and  this 
knowledge  is  a  most  cogent  evidence  for  the  authenticity 
of  the  book  which  narrates  the  history  of  the  entrance 
of  that  revelation  into  the  world.  It  is  the  book  which 
brings  him  the  gospel,  which  shows  its  power  to  make 
him  wise  unto  salvation  through  faith  which  is  in  Christ 
Jesus.  It  is  the  guide-book  which  leads  us  to  Christ  and 
along  the  path  of  the  Christian  life  to  the  blessedness  of 
heaven.  The  more  we  use  it,  the  more  does  it  prove  itself 
true  in  the  test  of  practice,  as  it  has  proved  itself  true  in 
the  experience  of  God's  children  in  all  ages.     There  is  no 


THE   HOLY   SCJKIPTURES  85 

test  of  a  guide-book  like  tljis,  that  it  leads  us  to  the  land 
we  seek  and  carries  ns  safely  through  it,  so  that  its  second- 
hand knowledge  brings  us  to  first-hand  knowledge  and  is 
verified  by  that  first-hand  knowledge.  And  then,  the 
Christian  to-day  who  is  led  by  the  Spirit  of  God  recog- 
nizes in  the  Bible  the  work  and  the  presence  of  that 
Spirit. 

III.  We  ask  now  respecting  the  necessity  of  the  Bible. 
And  here  the  answer  is  to  a  considerable  degree  antici- 
pated. The  Scriptures  are  essential  to  the  highest  spiritual 
well-being  of  the  individual  Christian  and  the  church. 

We  have  been  careful  in  our  discussions  to  distinguish 
between  the  redemptive  revelation  and  the  Scriptures 
which  record  it.  The  distinction  is  a  most  important  one 
for  many  reasons.  There  have  been  considerable  periods 
in  the  history  of  God's  people  when  important  portions  of 
the  revelation  have  been  unrecorded  and  yet  have  done 
their  work  upon  the  hearts  of  men.  A  hundred  years 
passed  before  our  New  Testament  was  generally  accepted, 
during  which  time  the  revelation  lived  in  oral  tradition, 
and  thousands  of  souls  were  converted  and  saved  by  it. 
We  might  even  conceive  of  circumstances  under  which 
the  same  thing  could  occur  to-day.  Our  missionaries 
generally  make  converts  before  they  translate  the  Scrip- 
tures. And  yet,  for  the  normal  existence  and  growth  of 
Christianity,  the  Scriptures  are  a  necessity.  It  is  not 
enough  that  souls  should  be  brought  to  Christ ;  it  is  need- 
ful that  they  should  be  brought  in  the  right  way.  It  is 
not  enough  that  they  should  acknowledge  Christ  in  their 
lives  ;  they  should  be  built  up  in  riglit  Christian  character 
and  brought  to  do,  in  right  and  fruitful  ways,  the  work 
of  God's  kingdom.  Granting  that  men  might  have  a 
genuine  knowledge  of  God's  revelation  in  Christ  through 
personal  experience  without  the  agency  of  the  Scriptures, 
that  knowledge  would  inevitably  be  one-sided,  imperfect, 
and  even,  in  many  of  its  elements,  false.     Christians  do 


86  PRESENT   DAY    THEOLOGY 

not  by  the  new  birth  spring  ininiediatolj'  into  perfectness, 
either  of  character  or  knowledge.  Sin  and  the  spiritual, 
moral,  and  intellectual  disturbance  which  sin  produces  still 
remain  in  greater  or  less  measure  in  every  Christian.  The 
spiritual  eye  of  the  best  Christian  is  near-sighted  and 
wrong-sighted.  Hence  the  need  of  a  standard  and  guide 
by  which  the  individual  imperfections  and  errors  may  be 
corrected.  This  the  Bible  affords.  Here  the  redemptive 
revelation  is  given  in  its  primitive  simplicity.  It  is  por- 
trayed by  men  who  were  supernaturally  guided  by  God 
and  guarded,  so  far  as  the  revelation  itself  was  concerned, 
from  the  false  and  one-sided  views  into  which  ordinary 
men  fall,  by  the  prophets  and  apostles,  by  the  Christ  him- 
self. Take  the  individual  Christian  life  to-day  in  its  nor- 
mal and  best  form,  and  you  find  it  owes  its  origin  and  its 
growth  to  the  Bible.  The  true  Christian  is  the  Bible 
Christian.  He  glories  in  his  Christian  experience.  He 
would  not  exchange  it  for  forty  thousand  Bibles.  But  he 
knows  that  the  Bible  first  brought  him  into  that  experience 
and  that  it  has  nourished  and  sustained  it.  And  so  he 
does  not  put  his  individual  experience  above  the  Bible,  but 
rather  aims  to  correct  and  shape  it  by  the  Bible.  He  is 
like  the  near-sighted  man,  who  rejoices  that  he  sees  out  of 
his  own  e^'es  and  would  not  give  his  own  sight  in  exchange 
for  any  stories  of  others  or  help  of  books,  yet  who  corrects 
his  defects  of  vision  by  the  assistance  of  better  eyes  than 
his. 

And  if  the  Bible  is  so  important  to  the  individual,  still 
more  to  the  Christian  church.  It  is  doubtful  whether 
there  ever  would  have  been  a  church,  after  the  first 
Christian  century  had  passed  away,  if  there  had  not  been 
a  Bible.  It  is  on  the  Bible  that  the  church  is  based  and 
to  the  Bible  that  it  owes  its  continued  existence.  In  all 
the  controversies,  doctrinal,  ecclesiastical,  and  moral,  M'hich 
have  torn  Christendom  since  the  days  of  the  apostles,  con- 
troversies which  have  often  threatened  to  destroy  its  very 


THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES  87 

existence,  the  Bible  has  been  the  rallying-point  of  all  true 
Christians.  The  Bible  view  has  always  triumphed  in  the 
end.  Who  can  tell  into  what  vagaries  of  doctrine  and 
practice  the  church  might  have  run,  and,  humanly  speak- 
ing, would  have  run,  had  it  not  been  for  the  Bible  stand- 
ing like  a  rock  in  the  midst  of  the  waves  of  conti'oversy 
and  maintaining  tiie  unchanging  and  perfect  truth  of 
God  !  So  the  errors  into  which  the  church  has  fallen, 
and  in  which  so  large  a  section  of  the  church  is  still  in- 
volved, arose  from  the  neglect  or  subordination  of  the 
Bible.  When  the  Eoman  church  put  tradition  and  the  au- 
thorit}'-  of  the  church  upon  the  same  level  with  the  Bi- 
ble it  made  certain  all  the  abuses  and  errors  of  its  later 
career.  And  when  Protestantism  came  forth  from  Ro- 
manism, it  vindicated  its  right  of  existence  and  its  claim 
to  be  the  true  representative  of  the  universal  church 
by  planting  itself  upon  the  sole  authority  of  the  Bible. 
When  to-day,  or  in  any  age.  Christians  place  a  creed,  or  a 
theology,  or  a  form  of  government,  or  a  mode  of  worship 
on  a  level  with  the  Bible,  they  fall  away  from  the  true 
Christian  and  Protestant  position.  The  Christian  con- 
sciousness has  its  importance  and  its  inalienable  rights. 
But  whether  it  be  the  consciousness  of  the  individual  or 
the  collective  consciousness  of  the  church,  it  is  human 
and  subject  to  error,  and  it  must  be  measured  and  judged 
by  the  standard  of  the  Bible. 

lY.  This  bi'ings  us,  in  the  last  place,  to  consider  the 
authority  of  the  Bible.  What  do  we  mean  when  we  give 
the  Bible  this  high  place  ?  The  reproach  is  often  cast 
upon  Protestants  of  having  put  a  book  in  the  place  of  the 
Pope  and  church,  a  "  paper  Pope,"  to  whose  authority 
they  bow  with  a  superstition  quite  equal  to  that  of  their 
Romish  fellow-Christians.  But  the  charge  rests  upon  an 
entire  misapprehension  of  the  Protestant  position.  When 
we  call  the  Bible  the  supreme  authority  in  all  matters  of 
faith  and  practice,  we  are  not  exalting  the  Bible  as  a 


88  PRESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

book,  but  as  a  record  of  God's  redemptive  revelation. 
The  authority  to  which  we  bow  is  not  that  of  a  boolv  or 
of  our  fellow-men,  but  of  God  Himself.  As  the  West- 
minster Confession  says,  "  God  alone  is  Lord  of  the  con- 
science "  (Confession  of  Faith,  ch.  xx.,  sec.  2).  Or,  as 
Paul  puts  it,  "  There  is  no  authority  but  of  God  "  (Rom. 
xiii.  1,  see  Greek).  It  is  because  the  Bible  brings  us 
God's  self-revelation  in  authentic  and  original  form  that 
we  submit  ourselves  to  it  as  our  highest  guide.  Espec- 
ially it  is  because  the  Bible  gives  us  the  mind  of  Christ, 
our  Divine  Lord  and  Saviour,  the  Way,  the  Truth,  and 
the  Life,  that  we  accept  it  as  our  authority.  But  the 
Bible  as  a  mere  book  has  no  authority.  We  bow  in  al- 
legiance to  the  ever-living  Father,  the  present  Christ,  the 
indwelling  Spirit,  whom  we  see  working  in  the  world 
about  us  for  the  redemption  of  mankind,  whose  gracious 
communion  and  efficiency  form  a  part  of  our  own  experi- 
ence. It  is  because  the  Bible  reveals  them  to  us,  because 
it  gives  us  the  history  of  their  redemptive  grace,  and  so 
makes  known  their  will  and  interprets  our  experience  to 
us,  that  we  acknowledge  it  as  our  supreme  rule  of  faith 
and  practice. 

The  sober-minded  Protestant  Christian  is,  therefore, 
not  a  Bible-worshipper.  His  Bible  is  a  means,  not  an  end. 
It  is  worth  just  as  much  to  him  as  it  gives  him  of  God 
Himself.  It  is  an  authority  to  him  as  the  chart  and  the 
"Nautical  Almanac  "  are  to  the  mariner,  when  they  enable 
him  to  n}ake  a  good  landfall.  AVhen  the  traveller  stands 
upon  the  Corner  Grat,  with  that  never-to-be-forgotten  sea 
of  frozen  billows  rising  before  him,  the  panorama  in  his 
guide-book  is  his  authoritj'  just  in  so  far  as  it  enables  him 
to  identifj^  the  details  in  the  scene  upon  which  he  is  gaz- 

Hence  the  importance,  if  the  authoritj'  of  the  Bible  is 
to  be  recognized  in  its  true  meaning,  of  correct  principles 
of  interpretation.     It  is  possible  so  to  abuse  the  Script- 


THE  HOLY   SCKIPTUEES  89 

ures  that  they  are  misleading  rather  than  helpful.  How 
often  theologians  have  been  guilty  of  this  misuse,  making 
the  Bible  support  their  theories,  to  the  utter  disregard  of 
its  real  meaning  !  No  wonder  that  the  notion  has  become 
widely  prevalent  that  the  Scriptures  can  be  made  to  teach 
anything.  How  often  indolent  Christians,  who  prefer 
to  cull  a  few  proof-texts  here  and  there  rather  than  to 
search  the  Scriptures,  have  allowed  themselves  to  become 
entangled  in  erroneous  views  of  God  and  His  truth  !  "  The 
Devil  can  cite  Scripture  for  his  pui-pose,"  and  even  the 
children  of  God  allow  themselves  to  be  imposed  upon  by 
his  exegesis.  If  the  Bible  is  to  be  our  authority,  we  must 
study  it  faithfully  and  rightly.  Let  us  briefly  glance  at 
the  requisites  for  its  understanding. 

We  must  study  it  under  the  guidance  of  God's  Spirit. 
The  revelation  with  which  it  is  concerned  is  spiritual,  and 
both  revelation  and  record  for  their  right  apprehension 
require  spiritual  discernment.  The  first  qualification  of 
the  Bible  student,  as  of  the  theologian,  is  the  prayerful 
frame  which  seeks  direction  from  the  Author  of  truth. 
Augustine  laid  down  the  principle  that  faith  must  precede 
knowledge  {Fides  jpvcmedit  intellecUmi),  and  certainly  it 
holds  good  with  respect  to  study  of  the  Scriptures.  He 
who  will  understand  a  work  of  art  must  have  something 
of  the  artist's  spirit.  He  who  will  understand  God's  reve- 
lation as  it  is  recorded  in  the  Bible  must  have  God  Him- 
self for  his  Teacher. 

AVe  need  to  study  the  Bible  in  the  light  of  the  expe- 
rience and  teachings  of  the  Christian  church.  If  we  re- 
ject the  authority  of  the  church,  it  does  not  follow  that 
we  are  to  reject  its  helpful  guidance.  Eighteen  centuries 
of  Bible  study  lie  behind  us,  and  although  many  mistakes 
have  been  made,  to  a  great  extent  an  understanding  has 
been  reached  of  the  true  meaning  of  the  Bible,  and  .reached 
by  both  theoretical  and  practical  ways.  We  cannot  aiford 
to  ignore  the  fund  of  Scriptural  knowledge  which  has  thus 


90  PKESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

been  gathered.  In  the  great  essentials  a  far  larger  degree 
of  unanimity  has  been  reached  than  is  commonly  sup- 
posed. We  do  not  to-day  approach  the  Bible  as  discov- 
erers in  a  new  land ;  we  are  passing  over  ground  every 
foot  of  which  has  been  trodden  a  million  times  by  eager 
feet. 

We  must  study  the  Bible  closely  and  critical!}',  accord- 
ing to  the  methods  we  emplo}'  in  the  interpretation  of 
other  books.  When  we  treat  it  as  a  mere  collection  of 
oracles,  to  be  taken  separately  and  at  random,  apart  from 
their  context  and  without  reference  to  the  purpose  of  the 
book  in  which  they  occur,  we  degrade  the  Bible  and  show 
disrespect  to  Him  whose  revelation  it  brings  to  us.  There 
are  difficulties  in  the  way  of  understanding  the  Scriptures 
arising  from  the  fact  that  they  were  written  in  languages 
strange  to  us,  and  under  circumstances  very  different  from 
ours.  But  these  difficulties  may  be  surmounted,  even  by 
the  ordinary  reader  who  is  unacquainted  with  the  original 
tongues,  with  far  less  labor  than  is  generally  supposed. 
Let  us  honor  the  Bible  by  coming  to  it  with  the  confidence 
that  it  is  a  rational  book  and  that  it  can  be  understood  if 
we  read  it  in  rational  ways.  Surely  we  shall  not  be  put 
to  shame. 

And  then,  we  must  study  the  Bible  with  the  recogni- 
tion of  the  historical  and  progressive  character  of  the  reve- 
lation it  records.  When  we  seek  for  the  divine  authority 
which  it  conveys  to  us  we  shall  remember  that  the  re- 
demptive revelation  was  made  "by  divers  portions  and 
in  divers  manners"  (Heb.  i.  1).  The  Old  Testament  has 
not  the  same  authority  for  us  that  the  New  has,  because 
the  higher  revelation  of  the  latter  modifies,  and  renders 
to  some  extent  superfluous,  that  of  the  former.  So  in 
the  New  Testament,  there  are  many  things  that  are 
to  be  explained  in  the  light  of  local  and  temporarj' 
exigencies,  and  we  in  our  different  circumstances  must 
exercise  wise  discrimination  to  distinguish  the  principle 


THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES  91 

from  the  precept,  the  eternal  truth  from  its  ephemeral 
form. 

But  he  who  studies  the  Bible  faithfully,  using  all  spirit- 
ual and  rational  means  for  its  understanding,  will  not  fail 
to  find  in  it  the  authority  he  needs  for  his  guidance  in  this 
world  and  his  assurance  of  blessedness  in  the  next.  More 
and  more  it  will  be  "  a  lamp  unto  his  feet  and  a  light  unto 
his  path  "  (Ps.  cxix,  105),  By  its  aid  he  will  be  brought 
into  the  presence  and  counsel  of  God  and  enabled  to  be- 
come a  fellow-laborer  with  Him  in  building  up  His  king- 
dom. Let  us  pray  that  this  may  be  so  with  all  of  us. 
And  let  us  also  pray  that  the  church  of  Christ  may  return 
with  more  simplicity  and  humility  to  the  position  of  primi- 
tive Christianity  and  primitive  Protestantism,  the  sole  au- 
thority of  the  Word  of  God  as  given  to  us  in  the  Bible. 
The  words  of  the  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith  (chap. 
i.,  sec.  10)  deserve  to  be  written  in  letters  of  gold  : 

*'  The  Supreme  Judge,  by  which  all  controversies  of  re- 
ligion are  to  be  determined,  and  all  decrees  of  councils, 
opinions  of  ancient  writers,  doctrines  of  men,  and  private 
spirits  are  to  be  examined,  and  in  whose  sentence  we  are 
to  rest,  can  be  no  other  but  the  Holy  Spirit  speaking  in 
the  Scripture." 


YI. 

INSPIRATION 

In  tlie  chapter  on  the  Holy  Scriptures  I  pni-posely  re- 
frained from  touching  upon  the  subject  of  their  inspira- 
tion— partly  because  there  are  advantages  in  considering 
the  Bible  as  a  record  of  revelation  before  raising  the  ques- 
tion whether  any  special  divine  influence  was  exerted  in 
its  composition,  and  partly  because  the  great  importance 
of  the  doctrine  of  inspiration  makes  it  worthy  of  a  sepa- 
rate treatment.  To  this  subject  we  shall  now  address  our- 
selves. Unquestionably  it  involves  especial  difficulties. 
Xo  Christian  doctrine  is  at  the  present  time  more  widely 
discussed.  It  is  a  stumbling-block  to  unbelievers  and  a 
perplexity  to  many  earnest  Christians.  Even  Christian 
theologians,  while  generally  admitting  that  there  is  a  true 
sense  in  which  the  biblical  authors  were  inspired,  differ 
widely  in  their  explanations  of  what  inspiration  was.  It 
is,  therefore,  incumbent  upon  us  to  approach  the  subject 
with  modesty  and  candor,  not  for  the  purpose  of  confirm- 
ing our  preconceived  opinions,  but  with  the  earnest  desire 
to  discover  the  truth  and  a  hearty  reliance  upon  the  Spirit 
of  truth. 

I.  We  are  met  at  the  outset  by  the  fact  that  the  Scrip- 
tures, through  which  we  gain  our  chief  knowledge  of  the 
nature  and  circumstances  of  the  redemptive  revelation, 
teach  a  doctrine  of  inspiration  much  broader  than  that 
which  we  designate  as  the  doctrine  of  the  inspiration  of 
the  Scriptures.  The  former  is  the  generic  doctrine  ;  the 
latter  is  a  special  case  under  it.     We  need  for  the  proper 


INSPIEATION  93 

understanding  of  the  scriptural  inspiration  a  knowledge 
of  inspiration  in  the  broader  sense. 

From  the  beginning  of  His  redemptive  revelation  God 
worked  through  chosen  instruments.  His  purpose  was  to 
save  man  by  men.  We  have  seen,  when  dealing  with  the 
subject  of  revelation,  how  these  men  were  selected  and 
educated  for  their  work.  Agencies  natural  and  super- 
natural were  brought  to  bear  upon  them  to  fit  them  for 
the  parts  God  had  for  them  to  play  in  the  establishment 
of  His  kingdom.  But  it  was  not  sufficient  that  they 
should  be  trained  until  their  souls  wei-e  provided  with  the 
requisite  natural  and  spiritual  qualifications.  The  work 
was  one  for  wdiicli  human  powers  would  not  suffice.  It 
was  needful  that  there  should  be  a  supernatural  equip- 
ment. God  Himself,  through  the  Holy  Spirit,  nnist  act 
in  and  through  them,  not  as  God  ordinarily  works  by 
means  of  second  causes,  but  with  a  direct  access  and  effici- 
ency of  the  First  Cause.  This  was  inspiration.  We  may 
define  it  as  an  official  endowment  with  the  Holy  Spirit 
for  ends  connected  with  the  redemptive  revelation  or  the 
establishment  of  God's  kingdom.  It  belonged  to  the  first 
introduction  of  the  redemptive  revelation  into  the  world. 
It  ceased  when  this  was  conipleted.  Whatever  tasks  were 
necessary  to  the  full  carrying  out  of  God's  plan  of  revela- 
tion might  have  this  special  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

Thus,  to  look  first  at  the  Old  Testament,  Moses  was 
endowed  for  his  work  as  the  deliverer,  lawgiver,  and  ruler 
of  Israel.  The  power  by  which  he  made  known  God's 
will  to  the  Chosen  People  and  to  Pharaoh,  and  by  which 
he  performed  the  great  miracles  of  judgment  and  redemp- 
tion, was  the  exti-aordinary  and  supernaturally  given  power 
of  God  (Ex.  iii.  11,  12,  iv.  1-23).  He  is  said  to  have 
been  possessed  of  the  divine  Spirit  (JSTumb,  xi.  lY  seq.). 
The  judges  were  inspired  to  govern  Israel  and  fight  her 
battles  in  the  age  of  demoralization  which  followed  the 
conquest  of  the  Promised  Land.     We  are  told  that  Gid- 


94  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

eon,  Jeplithah,  and  Sampson  performed  their  deeds  of 
valor,  by  which  the  nation's  life  was  preserved  and  God's 
redemptive  work  forwarded,  by  the  power  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  (Judges  vi.  24:,  xi,  29,  xiii.  25).  Three  classes  of 
functionaries  represented  God  in  the  Theocracy,  mediat- 
ing between  Him  and  His  people,  carrying  out  His  re- 
demptive work  and  establishing  His  kingdom — prophets, 
priests,  and  kings.  They  were  all  men  specially  endowed 
for  their  work ;  at  least  this  was  the  case  when  they  were 
faithful  to  their  office.  Their  endowment  with  the  Holy 
Spirit  was  symbolized  by  their  anointing,  the  solemn  con- 
secration setting  them  apart  to  their  work.  The  divine 
Spirit  was  given  to  Saul  when  he  was  anointed  and  mani- 
fested its  presence  by  the  gift  of  prophecy.  When  he 
proved  unfaithful,  the  Spirit  was  taken  from  him  and 
given  to  David  (1  Sam.  x.  6,  xvi.  13).  The  typical  in- 
stance of  Old  Testament  inspiration  is  that  of  the  proph- 
ets. They  were  God's  especial  confidants  and  organs. 
They  received  His  messages  and  made  them  known  to 
men.  In  many  cases  they  were  empowered  to  perform 
miracles.  Occasionally  the  conduct  of  the  government 
was  committed,  for  a  longer  or  shorter  time,  to  their 
hands.  To  them  the  divine  Spirit  was  given  in  especial 
measure.  They  were  by  way  of  eminence  the  "  men  of 
the  Spirit"  (Hos.  ix.  7,  see  Hebrew).  Everywhere  in  the 
Old  Testament  their  prophetic  power  is  ascribed  to  the 
Holy  Spirit  (Kumb.  xi.  25-27;  1  Sam.  xix.  23,  24;  2  Sam. 
xxiii.  2  ;  Neh.  ix.  20,  30 ;  Ezek.  ii.  2 ;  Zech.  vii.  12  ;  Mic. 
iii.  8).  But  the  inspiration  of  the  prophets,  priests,  and 
kings  of  the  Old  Dispensation  was  imperfect,  and,  as  time 
went  on,  there  emerged  in  the  prophetic  consciousness  the 
presentiment  of  a  complete  realization  of  the  ideal  of  in- 
spiration in  the  Messiah  (Is.  xi.  2,  xlii.  1,  Ixi.  1),  while 
far  off  upon  the  ntmost  horizon  of  inspired  vision  ap- 
peared the  assurance  of  a  wonderful  outpouring  of  the 
Spirit  upon  the  church  of  the  future  (Joel  ii.  28,  29). 


INSPIRATION  95 

We  pass  to  the  New  Testament  doctrine  of  inspiration. 
The  Saviour  came.  In  him  the  prophetic  predictions 
were  fulfilled.  At  his  baptism  he  was  set  apai-t  for  his 
redemptive  work.  God  gave  His  approval.  The  descend- 
ing dove  and  the  baptism  with  water  symbolized  the  gift 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  by  which  he  was  endowed  for  his 
work.  This  was  the  anointing,  the  official  capacitation  for 
his  redemptive  ministry,  by  which  he  was  recognized  as 
the  Messiah,  the  Christ,  the  Anointed  One,  the  divinely 
human  Prophet,  Priest,  and  King  (Matt.  iii.  16  and  par- 
allel passages).  He  possessed  the  Spirit  without  meas- 
ure (John  iii.  34).  In  his  inaugural  address  in  the  syna- 
gogue at  Nazareth  he  appropriated  the  Old  Testament 
prophecy  of  his  inspiration  (Luke  iv.  18;  cf.  Is.  Ixi.  1  seq.). 
All  his  messianic  v/ork  was  done  through  the  Spirit,  his 
preaching,  his  miracles,  his  sacrificial  death,  his  resurrec- 
tion. He  alone  of  all  God's  servants,  since  he  was  at  once 
Son  of  God  and  perfect  man,  was  the  perfect  medium 
of  the  Spirit.  He  was  himself  the  perfect  revelation  of 
God. 

The  instruments  of  Christ  in  the  founding  of  the 
church  and  the  first  work  of  the  kingdom  were  the  twelve 
apostles.  Comparatively  early  in  his  ministry  the  Saviour 
began  to  promise  them  the  special  indwelling  of  the 
Spirit  to  capacitate  them  for  their  work.  When  they  w^ere 
brought  before  kings  and  governors,  he  told  them,  they 
should  not  take  heed  what  they  should  say,  for  the  Spirit 
should  give  them  the  needed  utterance  (Matt.  x.  16-20 
and  parallel  passages).  But  most  clearly  and  fully  were 
his  promises  of  the  Spirit  given  them  in  that  tender  and 
wonderful  discourse  which  followed  the  Last  Supper,  and 
which  John  has  recorded.  The  Saviour  himself  must 
leave  them.  They  could  not  understand  his  person  or  do 
his  work  while  he  was  with  them.  But  after  his  death 
and  ascension  the  Holy  Spirit  was  to  be  given  them  as  his 
representative  and  their  helper,  the  Paraclete.    He  would 


96  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

equip  tliein  for  their  work,  taking  the  things  of  the  risen 
Christ  and  giving  them  to  them,  leading  them  into  all  the 
truth,  bringing  to  their  remembrance  all  that  Christ  liad 
said  unto  them,  revealing  the  things  to  come.  Through 
them  lie  would  convince  the  world  of  sin  and  righteous- 
ness  and  judgment  (John  xiv.  16,  17,  26,  xv.  26,  27,  xvi. 
7-15).  The  deepest  view  of  this  last  discourse  regards  it 
as  intended  primarily  for  the  apostles  and  their  associate 
workers  for  the  kingdom  in  the  first  age  of  Christianity, 
and  only  secondarily,  like  an  overflowing  cup,  for  the 
Christians  of  the  coming  ages.  The  Saviour's  promises 
began  to  be  fulfilled  on  the  day  of  Pentecost.  The  visi- 
ble symbols  of  that  marvellous  occasion  may  be  compared 
with  the  audible  voice  and  descending  dove  at  the  baptism 
of  Christ.  The  real  event  was  the  invisible  outpouring 
of  the  Spirit,  by  which  the  church  was  capacitated  for 
its  work  of  converting  the  world  to  Christ.  The  tongues 
of  fire  and  the  speaking  in  strange  languages  were  em- 
blems of  the  work  the  apostles  and  their  companions  had 
to  do,  the  conquest  of  mankind  by  the  foolishness  of 
preaching.  The  descending  Spirit  brought  gifts  unto  men 
f  i-om  the  risen  Christ  (Eph.  iv.  8),  some  supernatural,  some 
natural.  So  far  as  lie  dwelt  in  the  early  Christians  super- 
naturally  they  were  inspired,  Paul  has  given  ns  in  the 
epistles  to  the  Corinthians  and  the  Romans  a  full  account 
of  these  charisms,  or  gifts  of  grace  (1  Cor.  xii.-xiv.  ; 
Rom.  xii.).  They  were  of  the  nature  of  the  gifts  bestowed 
upon  the  Old  Testament  prophets,  official  endowment  for 
work  connected  with  the  redemptive  revelation.  They 
were  partly  supernatui-al,  as  we  have  said,  and  partly  natu- 
ral. So  far  as  the  work  required  more  than  the  natural 
powers  of  the  first  teachers  of  Christianity  could  accom- 
plish, the  supernatui-al  inspiration,  with  its  supernatural 
powers,  was  given.  In  the  strength  of  it  the  apostles 
and  apostolic  men  proclaimed  the  gospel,  received  revela- 
tions from  God,  wrought  miracles.     Paul  could  say  of  his 


INSPIRATION  97 

gospel,  "  Wliich  things  also  we  speak,  not  in  the  words 
which  man's  wisdom  teacheth,  but  which  the  Holy  Ghost 
teacheth  ''  (1  Cor.  ii.  13).  The  foundation  work  of  the 
New  Dispensation  was  done  by  inspired  men. 

Before  leaving  this  branch  of  our  subject  we  must 
briefly  answer  the  question.  What  was  the  nature  of  tliis 
inspiration  of  which  the  Bible  gives  such  abundant  ac- 
count ?  We  have  seen  that,  first  of  all,  it  was  distinct- 
ively supernatural.  On  this  point  no  one  who  reverently 
studies  the  facts  can  have  the  slightest  doubt.  This  was 
not  the  working  of  human  genius,  even  in  its  highest  ex- 
ercises. jSTeither  was  it  that  gracious  illumination  and 
power  of  the  Holy  Spirit  granted  to  Christians  in  all  ages. 
Take  the  miracles  as  affording  a  crucial  test.  Genius  and 
spiritual  capacity  are  utterly  incapable  of  explaining  them. 
They  were  performed  through  the  supernatural  aid  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  The  same  may  be  said  of  prophecy,  though 
the  proof  is  not  at  first  so  evident.  ISTevertheless,  inspi- 
ration did  not  suppress  the  individuality  of  the  inspired 
man.  He  was  not  like  the  heathen  mantic,  or  his  modern 
congener  the  spiritualistic  medium,  in  whom  the  personal 
consciousness  is  either  entirely  destroyed  or  reduced  to  a 
minimum.  He  was  the  free,  self-conscious  agent  of  the 
divine  purpose,  a  fellow-laborer  with  God,  working  with 
intelligent  and  sympathetic  co-operation  under  the  direc- 
tion of  his  Master.  His  natural  talents  and  spiritual  capac- 
ities, instead  of  being  suppressed,  were  the  indispensable  ba- 
sis and  condition  of  his  inspiration.  The  same  Spirit  of 
God  who  dwells  in  every  man  as  the  source  of  all  natural 
endowments,  and  dwells  in  the  pious  soul  as  the  motive 
power  of  all  spiritual  illumination,  sanctification,  and  activ- 
ity, dwelt  in  the  inspired  soul,  a  soul  of  high  natural  gifts 
and  religious  attainments,  to  qualify  it  for  great  tasks  con- 
nected with  the  introduction  of  the  redemptive  revelation 
into  the  world.  The  prophet  was  never  more  himself 
than  when  he  was  under  the  influence  of  the  divine 
7 


98  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

Spirit.  All  his  powers  were  quickened  and  elevated.  It 
was  an  anticipation  of  that  true  relation  to  God  which 
shall  come  when  sin  has  ceased  and  the  normal  and  ideal 
manhood  has  been  attained  by  redemption.  Yet  it  is  to 
be  noted  that  while  inspiration  rendered  the  inspired 
man  capable  of  performing  the  special  task  connected  with 
revelation,  receiving  and  communicating  truth,  working 
miracles,  predicting  the  future,  governing  God's  people,  or 
whatever  it  might  be,  it  did  not  render  him  perfect  or 
infallible  in  other  respects.  He  was  not  yet  the  perfect 
man,  but  only  an  imperfect,  sinful,  feeble  servant  of  God, 
made  strong  for  a  particular  task,  and  remaining  imperfect 
in  all  matters  lying  outside  of  that  task. 

II.  Such  is  the  background  which  the  general  doctrine 
of  inspiration  affords  us.  We  come  now  to  the  special 
subject  of  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures.  Are  the 
Scriptures  inspired  ?  that  is  the  next  question  which  meets 
us.  Or  it  may  be  better  to  put  the  question  in  a  slightly 
different  form,  namely.  Were  the  sacred  writers  inspired 
to  write  the  books  which  constitute  the  Bible  ? 

In  entering  upon  the  proof  that  the  Bible  is  thus  in- 
spired, let  us  recall  what  the  Bible  is.  We  have  seen 
that  it  is  the  record  of  the  redemptive  revelation.  We 
have  also  seen  that  it  is  a  complex  whole,  an  organism 
consisting  of  many  members.  We  must  bear  this  con- 
stantly in  mind  in  discussing  the  question  of  its  insjiira- 
tion.  The  method  of  procedure  often  followed  is  precisely 
the  opposite.  The  Bible  is  treated  as  if  it  was  a  mere 
random  mass  of  ancient  literature,  of  which  the  parts 
stand  in  no  real  connection  with  each  other.  A  single 
book  is  taken,  out  of  its  relation  with  the  rest,  and  the 
question  is  asked,  Is  it  inspired  ?  And  if,  as  may  readily 
be  the  case,  the  book  happens  to  be  one  which  is  some- 
what remotely  connected  with  the  central  facts  of  the  re- 
demptive revelation,  the  conclusion  is  hastily  drawn  that 
there  is  no  such  thing  as  Scriptural  inspiration.     But  no 


INSPIRATIOlSr  99 

method  could  be  more  false  than  this.  Onr  starting-point 
must  be  from  the  Bible  as  a  great  organized  whole,  and 
each  part  must  be  judged  in  relation  to  the  whole.  Who 
can  understand  a  single  member  of  the  body  if  it  is 
viewed  as  a  mere  mass  of  bone  and  flesh  without  reference 
to  the  organism  of  which  it  forms  an  integral  pai't  ?  Who 
shall  determine  the  question  whether  any  portion  of  the 
body  contains  the  common  life,  if  it  be  examined  alone 
and  by  itself  ?  If  we  have  good  reason  to  believe  that  the 
Bible  in  its  unity  is  an  inspired  book,  we  shall  have  com- 
paratively little  difficulty  in  dealing  with  its  component 
parts. 

!Now  the  Bible,  as  we  know  with  the  greatest  certainty, 
was  for  the  most  part  written  b}'  the  very  men  whom  we 
also  know  to  have  been  inspired  in  the  more  general  sense, 
that  is,  by  men  who  were  God's  instruments  in  perform- 
ing the  great  tasks  of  His  kingdom,  and  for  this  purpose 
were  under  a  special  influence  of  His  Spirit.  As  regards 
the  Old  Testament,  some  uncertainty  surrounds  the  ques- 
tion of  authorship.  As  we  have  seen  reason  to  believe,  it 
has  undergone  several  recensions  and  its  books  were  not 
all  originally  in  their  present  form.  Nevertheless,  there 
can  be  no  doubt  that  by  far  the  larger  part  of  the  Old 
Testament  was  composed  by  inspired  men,  such  men  as 
Moses,  David,  and  the  prophets,  men  who  certainly  were 
inspired  for  other  purposes.  So  far  as  the  N^ew  Testa- 
ment is  concerned,  the  writers  were  almost  exclusively  of 
this  class.  They  were  either  apostles  or  companions  of 
the  apostles,  whom  we  know  to  have  shared  the  apostolic 
inspiration.  Xow,  of  course,  it  is  possible  that  these  men 
were  only  inspired  for  other  purposes,  to  I'eveal  God  in 
word  and  deed,  or  perhaps  only  to  understand  and  receive 
the  revelation  and  to  perform  the  miracles  by  which  it 
was  outwardly  authenticated.  It  is  possible  that  we  are 
to  call  the  Bible  inspired  only  in  the  sense  that  its  more 
important  parts  are  the  work  of  men  thus  inspired,  so  that 


100  PRESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

the  inspiration  belongs  primarily  to  the  revelation,  and 
only  secondarily  and  indirectly  to  the  record.  And  yet, 
when  we  consider  the  importance  of  the  Bible,  that  it  was 
to  be  in  all  ages,  after  the  first,  the  rnle  of  faith  and  prac- 
tice, both  for  the  individual  and  the  church,  that  it  was 
to  be  the  source  of  the  Christian's  knowledge  of  the  reve- 
lation in  its  primitive  and  normal  form,  it  would  be  strange 
if  this  most  important  element  in  the  redemptive  revela- 
tion, this  means  by  which  its  work  was  to  be  carried  on  in 
all  the  Christian  ages,  was  not  the  result  of  a  special  and 
supernatural  influence  of  God's  spirit  in  the  men  who  com- 
posed the  biblical  books.  Otherwise  inspiration  would 
seem  to  fail  just  where  it  was  most  needed.  These  con- 
siderations aiford  a  strong  presumption  for  the  inspiration 
of  the  Scriptures  in  a  primary  rather  than  in  a  merely 
secondary  and  indirect  sense. 

But  to  pass  from  presumptive  to  positive  proof.  The 
Bible  itself  bears  evidence  of  having  been  prepared  under 
such  a  special  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Consider  the 
relation  of  the  parts  to  the  whole.  It  was  scarcely  possi- 
ble that  the  writers,  left  to  their  own  unassisted  powers, 
should  prepare  books  which  derived  their  chief  value  from 
their  relation  to  others  of  which  these  writers  were  wholly 
ignorant.  Yet  nothing  is  more  evident  to  the  thoughtful 
reader  of  the  Scriptures  than  that  this  is  the  case.  The 
inspiration  of  some  of  the  books,  as,  for  example,  the 
book  of  Esther,  seems  to  have  consisted  just  in  this,  that 
their  writers  were  capacitated  by  the  Spirit  to  forge  just 
the  link  that  Avas  needed  for  a  certain  part  of  the  great 
chain.  Then  the  contents  of  many  of  the  books  give  clear 
evidence  of  inspiration.  This  is  the  case  in  so  far  as  they 
are  themselves  revelations.  For  revelation  always  mani- 
fests inspiration.  Their  teachings  manifest  a  divine  guid- 
ance. Take,  for  example,  Paul's  wise  counsels  in  his 
epistles,  going  so  far  beyond  the  mere  good  sense  of  an 
ordinary  uninspired  Christian.     The  fact  that  Paul  never 


INSPIRATION  101 

once  trips,  that  lie  never  confounds  the  temporary  and  the 
permanent,  in  these  casual  letters,  is  to  my  mind  a  strong 
evidence  that  he  was  inspired  in  writing  them.  Again, 
the  form  of  the  biblical  writings  bears  in  many  cases  evi- 
dences of  inspiration.  I  do  not  believe  that  there  is  any 
evidence  of  what  is  commonly  called  verbal  inspiration, 
that  is,  of  the  dictation  of  the  very  words  of  the  Scripture 
by  the  Holy  Spirit.  But  I  cannot  doubt  that  the  lan- 
guage bears  the  marks  of  the  inspiring  God,  that  here  is 
a  sacred  language,  which  in  its  plastic  state  was  moulded 
by  the  Spirit  who  was  guiding  these  men  in  the  composi- 
tion of  the  most  wonderful  book  that  was  ever  written. 
And  then  there  is  this  significant  fact,  that  just  in  propor- 
tion as  a  Christian  is  led  by  the  Spirit  of  God  does  he 
recognize  the  presence  of  the  Spirit  in  the  Bible  in  these 
and  other  ways.  It  has  "  spiritual  things  for  spiritual 
men  "  (1  Cor.  ii.  13),  And  in  saying  this,  I  do  not  mean 
merely  that  they  find  a  revelation  in  it,  but  that  it  dis- 
closes itself  to  them  as  itself  in  a  true  sense  divine. 

I  have  left  till  the  last  the  testimony  which  the  Bible 
furnishes  respecting  its  inspiration.  The  scriptural  au- 
thors say  very  little  of  the  circumstances  under  which  they 
composed  their  books.  In  a  few  instances  we  discover  a  di- 
vine direction  to  write  (Ex.  xvii.  14,  xxxiv.  27,  28  ;  Numb, 
xxxiii.  2 ;  Deut.  xxxi.  19  ;  Is.  viii.  1,  xxx.  8  ;  Jer.  xxx.  1,  2, 
xxxvi.  2  ;  Ezek.  xxiv.  1,  2;  Rev.  i.  19).  But  these  are  the 
exception  rather  than  the  rule.  It  is  only  when  we  come  to 
the  New  Testament,  and  read  the  language  of  Christ  and 
the  apostles  respecting  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures,  that 
we  have  clear  and  explicit  testimony.  There  can  be  no 
doubt,  it  seems  to  me,  that  our  Saviour  regarded  the  He- 
brew Scriptures  as  inspired.  The  formula,  "  It  is  writ- 
ten," with  which  he  appeals  to  the  Old  Testament,  shows 
that  he  regarded  its  teachings  as  authoritative.  He  di- 
rectly asserts  the  inspiration  of  David  in  the  composition 
of  the  Psalms  (Matt.  xxii.  43).    It  is  the  Scripture  which 


102  PKESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

he  says  caunot  be  broken  (John  x.  35).  The  upostlet; 
also  eonstautl}^  quote  the  Old  Testament  with  forniuhia 
which  evidence  their  belief  in  its  inspiration,  "  The  llolj 
Ghost  saith,"  "  God  saith  by  the  mouth  of  His  servant," 
and  the  like  (Acts  i.  16,  iv.  25 ;  Itom.  xvi.  26  ;  1  Cor.  ix. 
9,  10 ;  Ileb,  iii.  7,  ix.  8).  Paul  declares  that  "  whatso- 
ever things  were  written  aforetime,  were  written  for  our 
learning,  that  we  through  patience  and  comfort  of  the 
Scriptures  might  have  hope  "  (Kom.  xv.  4).  Peter  is  speak- 
ing of  the  Scripture  when  he  says  that  "  prophecy  came 
not  in  old  time  by  the  will  of  man  ;  but  holy  men  of  God 
spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost "  (2  Pet. 
i.  21).  In  the  great  proof  passage  (2  Tim.  iii.  16)  the 
context  clearly  shows  that  when  the  apostle  affirms  that 
"  every  scripture  inspired  of  God  is  also  profitable  for 
teaching,  for  reproof,  for  correction,  for  instruction  which 
is  in  righteousness,"  he  is  speaking  of  the  Old  Testament 
as  a  whole. 

It  may  be  admitted  that  the  Xew  Testament  does  not 
vouch  for  its  inspiration  in  the  same  strong  terms  which 
it  employs  with  reference  to  the  Old.  The  writers  were 
not  aware  that  they  were  doing  a  work  so  important  and 
far-reaching  in  its  effects.  But  we  shall  not  forget  the 
Saviour's  promise  of  the  Spirit  to  lead  them  into  all  the 
truth,  and  to  bring  to  remembrance  the  things  Avhich  he 
had  told  them.  We  can  hardly  suppose  that  these  prom- 
ises failed  of  their  fulfilment  when  the  gospels  and  epis- 
tles were  written.  And  in  several  instances,  at  least,  the 
writers  use  language  which  betrays  their  consciousness  of 
inspiration  (1  Thess.  ii.  13 ;  2  Thess.  ii.  13-15  ;  1  John 
i.  3,  4;  see  also  Eph.  ii.  20).  In  2  Pet.  iii.  15,  16  the 
Pauline  epistles  are  declared  to  have  been  written  through 
a  divinely  imparted  wisdom,  and  are  placed  on  a  level  as 
*•  Scriptures  "  with  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament. 

For  these  reasons  we  do  not  liesitate  to  affirm  the  in- 
spiration of  the  Bible.     We  make  this  affirmation  of  the 


INSPIRATION  103 

Bible  as  a  whole  and  of  its  parts  as  well.  In  doing  this 
we  do  not  affirm  the  same  kind  or  degree  of  inspiration  in 
all  its  parts.  AVe  do  not  affirm  that  the  men  who  wrote 
the  Bible  and  the  men  who  collected  the  books  into  the 
Canon  received  the  same  divine  assistance.  Our  conten- 
tion is  that  God's  Spirit  presided  in  supernatural  wajs 
over  the  composition  and  formation  of  the  sacred  Book  of 
the  Christian  religion. 

III.  Tiie  most  difficult  portion  of  our  subject  is  still  to 
be  investigated.  What  was  the  nature  of  the  inspiration 
of  the  Bible  ?  "What  were  its  limitations  ?  And  here  we 
shall  be  aided  at  the  start  by  what  we  have  learned  re- 
specting inspiration  in  the  broader  sense  of  the  term.  As 
the  kings  and  prophets  and  apostles  were  capacitated  by 
the  indwelling  Spirit  for  precisely  the  work  in  the  estab- 
lishment of  God's  kingdom  which  lie  had  for  them  to  do, 
so  the  sacred  writers.  Their  task  was  to  furnish  an  au- 
thentic and  adequate  record  of  the  redemptive  revelation, 
a  record  that  should  give  to  later  ages  as  full  and  clear  a 
knowledge  of  the  introduction  of  that  revelation  into  the 
world  as  it  is  possible  for  human  language  on  the  written 
page  to  furnish.  This  they  did.  We  have  had  our  atten- 
tion called  in  the  previous  chapter  to  the  adaptedness  of 
the  Bible  to  its  purpose.  Was  there  ever  a  book  written 
which  had  the  power  so  to  carry  the  mind  back  into  the 
past  and  to  make  it  fresh  and  real  ?  The  mingling  of  the 
historical  and  the  didactic,  the  skilful  adjustment  of  prose 
to  poetry,  of  ethics  to  theology,  of  sentiment  to  high  rea- 
soning, the  fulness,  clearness,  and  many-sidedness  of  the 
narration  and  exposition  make  the  Bible  wholly  unique 
among  books,  whether  religious  or  secular.  The  inspiring 
Spirit  working  through  the  human  instruments  made  it 
the  book  it  is,  able  to  make  the  individual  wise  unto  sal- 
vation, and  to  build  up  the  church  on  its  most  holy  faith. 
Wherever  we  look,  we  see  in  it  the  presence  and  power  of 
the  Holy  Spirit. 


104  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

If,  now,  we  look  at  the  liuiiiaii  instrmnents  employed, 
there  is  every  reason  to  conclude  that  they,  like  the  organs 
of  inspiration  in  the  broader  sense,  did  their  work  as  the 
free,  self-conscious  fellow-laborers  with  God,  rather  tlian 
as  passive  tools  in  His  hands.  There  have  been  times  in 
the  history  of  the  Christian  church  when  the  sacred 
writers  were  supposed  to  have  been  like  the  unconscious 
instrument  npon  which  the  musician  plays  as  he  will,  or 
at  best  as  amanuenses  to  whom  the  Spirit  dictated  His 
message  for  mankind,  sentence  by  sentence  and  word  by 
word.  But  of  such  an  overpowering  influence  there  is  not 
the  slightest  trace  in  the  Bible  itself.  On  the  contrary, 
the  sacred  writers  seemed  to  have  worked  in  free  co-op- 
eration with  God.  There  was  no  suppression  of  personal- 
ity or  of  individual  peculiarities.  Isaiah,  Paul,  and  John 
wi'ite  each  in  2y^"0jprid  persona,  each  with  his  own  style 
and  diction,  each  expressing  the  divine  truth  in  his  own 
forms  of  thought.  Like  the  sunlight  that  pours  in  mani- 
fold beauty  of  coloring  through  the  stained  glass  windows 
of  some  great  cathedi'al,  the  divine  Spirit  manifests  Him- 
self in  almost  infinite  variety  and  richness  through  the 
writers  of  the  Bible. 

But  we  must  go  further  and  ask.  Did  inspiration  ren- 
der the  sacred  writers  infallible  ?  The  answer  requires 
careful  discrimination.  Infallibility  is  a  relative  term. 
We  ask,  infallible  in  what  respect  %  If  the  question  be, 
did  inspiration  render  the  Scriptures  a  complete,  ade- 
quate, true,  intelligible  record  of  revelation,  so  that  he 
who  studies  them  aright  may  attain  to  a  complete  and  un- 
erring knowledge  of  the  saving  truths  and  facts  of  that 
revelation,  I  should  not  hesitate  to  answer  the  question  in 
the  affirmative.  I  do  not  see  any  reason  to  doubt  that 
God  accomplished  His  purpose,  and  that  he  so  guided  the 
writers  of  the  Bible  that  they  were  preserved  from  frus- 
trating that  purpose.  It  is  sometimes  said  that  the  relig- 
ious and  moral  contents  of  the  Bible,  or  the  religious  and 


INSPIRATION  105 

moral  truth  which  it  teaches,  are  infallible.  And  though 
this  statement  seems  to  me  defective,  since  it  lays  no 
stress  upon  the  great  historical  facts  which  belong  to  the 
very  essence  of  revelation,  I  would  gladly  accept  it  in  the 
general  sense  which  it  is  meant  to  convey.  The  Christian 
church  has  tested  the  Bible  in  this  respect  now  for  well- 
nigh  eighteen  centuries,  and  it  has  found  it  just  what  it 
was  intended  to  be,  with  no  essential  fault  or  blemish. 
If  it  were  fallible  as  a  record  of  revelation,  we  miglit  well 
despair  of  reaching  Christian  truth. 

But  there  is  another  sense  in  which  we  may  ask  whether 
inspiration  rendered  the  sacred  writers  infallible.  Did  it 
render  them  infallible  in  matters  which  lay  outside  the 
scope  and  purpose  of  their  inspiration,  in  matters  not  di- 
rectly connected  with  the  revelation  which  they  had  to 
record,  or  only  incidental  to  the  record  ?  We  can  easily 
conceive  that  it  might  have  been  so.  But  we  have  no 
right  to  assume  that  it  is  so  until  we  have  examined  the 
facts.  Some  theologians  begin  with  the  dj)riori  princi- 
ple that  the  Bible  must  be  absolutely  inerrant,  and  boldly 
assert  that  this  is  the  case,  not  only  in  matters  which  per- 
tain to  the  great  purpose,  but  in  all  matters  whatsoever. 
But  if  the  facts  show  that  this  was  not  the  case,  which 
honors  God  the  most,  to  accept  his  method  of  making  a 
Bible  as  the  best,  or  to  insist  that  He  followed  the  method 
which  we  think  best  ?  Everyone  has  heard  of  that  King 
Alphonso  of  Castile,  in  the  thirteenth  century,  who  is  re- 
membered chiefly  for  having  said  that  had  he  been  pres- 
ent at  the  creation  he  could  have  given  the  Creator  some 
good  advice  about  matters  which  he  himself  thought 
wrong.  And  there  are  not  a  few  Alphonsos  at  the  pres- 
ent time  who  occupy  a  very  similar  attitude  toward  the 
Bible.  It  seems  a  very  good  and  pious  thing  to  insist 
that  the  Bible  is  absolutely  without  error.  But  nothing 
is  good  or  pious  that  is  contrary  to  facts.  Lord  Bacon 
("Advancement  of  Learning,"  Bk.  I.)  speaks  of  offering 


106  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

"  to  the  Author  of  truth  the  unclean  sacrifice  of  a  lie," 
and  raises  the  (ivie&tion,  A /i  opo/-tei '/neutiri  pro  Deof — 
whether  it  is  right  to  lie  for  God  ?  Nothing  has  done 
more  harm  to  the  cause  of  Christianity  than  the  well- 
meaning  but  mistaken  defences  which  have  been  em- 
ployed. 

Now  a  careful  examination  of  the  facts  shows  that  in- 
spiration did  not  render  the  sacred  writers  infallible  in 
everything,  however  infallible  they  may  have  been  in  that 
for  which  they  were  inspii'ed.  Let  us  look  at  the  subject 
in  detail  so  far  as  our  time  will  permit. 

1.  Inspiration  did  not  render  the  biblical  authors  scien- 
tific historians.  So  far  as  the  histoi-y  was  essential  to  the 
revelation  there  is  every  reason  to  believe  that  they  gave 
it  accurately.  But  literary  men  had  not  then  learned  to 
write  with  that  painstaking  and  conscientious  accuracy  in 
minor  details  which  modern  historians  have  attained.  In 
this  respect  the  sacred  wiiters  were  not  in  advance  of  their 
age.  So  we  find  some  discrepancies  between  them,  largely 
in  figures,  some  of  which  may  be  due  to  later  transcrib- 
ers, but  which  cannot  all  be  thus  explained  (compare 
Numb.  XXV.  9  with  1  Cor.  x.  8 ;  1  Kings  vi.  1  with  Acts 
xiii.  20  ;  Gen.  xlvi.  26,  27  with  Acts  vii.  14 ;  2  Sam.  xxiv. 
9  with  1  Chron.  xxi.  5  ;  2  Chron.  xxiv.  20  with  Matt, 
xxiii.  35).  Matthew,  by  a  slip  of  the  pen  or  a  confusion 
of  thought,  quotes  a  passage  as  from  Jeremiah  which  is 
really  from  Zechariah  (compare  Matt,  xxvii.  9  with 
Zech.  xi.  12,  13).  A  typical  instance  is  the  discrepancy, 
which  never  has  been  and  pi-obably  never  will  be  ex- 
plained, between  the  Synoptic  evangelists  and  John  re- 
specting the  day  and  time  of  the  Last  Supper. 

2.  Inspiration  did  not  render  the  sacred  writers  scientists 
and  philosophers.  No  good  end  would  have  been  accom- 
plished by  pushing  them  thus  in  advance  of  their  age. 
They  use  the  language  of  contemporary  belief  respecting 
the  world  and  the  human  soul.     Only  in  those  instances 


INSriKATION  107 

where  revelation  and  science  occupy  common  ground  do 
Nve  lind  them  rising  to  the  level  of  more  recently  discov- 
ered truth. 

3.  Inspiration  did  not  render  the  sacred  writers  scien- 
tific intei'preters  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  Xevv  Testa- 
ment authors  were  profoundly  convinced  of  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  Old  Testament.  They  believed  that  it  was 
throughout,  in  virtue  of  the  revelation  which  it  recorded, 
a  prophecy  of  Christ  and  the  Kingdom  of  God.  They 
recognized  the  fact  that  the  whole  history  of  Israel  and 
all  its  institutions  were  fulfilled  in  the  Kew  Dispensation. 
Accordingly,  they  used  the  Old  Testament  with  great 
freedom  in  proving  the  truth  of  Christianity.  A  modern 
exegete  would  he  sure  that  he  was  using  the  exact  words 
of  the  earlier  writing  and  in  the  precise  sense  it  was  in- 
tended to  convey.  The  ISTew  Testament  writers  took  little 
pains  to  attain  scholarly  exactitude.  Accoi-dingly,  we  find 
that  while  they  are  right  in  the  spirit  of  their  quotations, 
there  are  often  defects  in  the  letter.  It  was  an  error  of 
form  rather  than  of  substance  when  Matthew  said,  "  lie 
came  and  dwelt  in  a  city  called  ISTazareth ;  that  it  might 
be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  the  prophets,  he  shall 
be  called  a  In  azarene  "  (Matt.  ii.  23).  No  such  words  are 
to  be  found  in  the  Old  Testanient.  But  its  deepest  teach- 
ings relate  to  the  rejection  and  humiliation  of  the  Messiah. 
A  careful  examination  of  the  quotations  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament from  the  Old,  must  give  the  death-blow  to  the  doc- 
trine of  verbal  inspiration,  though  it  will  not  cast  doubt 
upon  the  deep  spiritual  understanding  of  the  older  Script- 
ures on  the  part  of  the  apostles  and  apostolic  writers. 

4.  Inspiration  did  not  raise  the  men  who  stood  on  the 
lower  planes  of  revelation  to  the  position  of  those  who 
occupied  the  higher  and  stood  close  to  the  Saviour.  Moses 
does  not  write  like  Isaiah,  nor  Jeremiah  like  Paul.  The 
tone  and  spirit  of  the  impi-ecatory  Psalms  are  not  those 
of  the  beloved  disciple.     It  cannot  be  denied  tliat  there 


108  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

are  evidences  of  a  lower  morality  in  the  Old  Testament 
than  in  the  Xew.  The  prophets  write  many  things  which 
the  apostles  could  not  have  written.  The  men  of  the  older 
age  stood  far  in  advance  of  their  uninspired  contempo- 
raries in  all  the  essentials  of  their  message,  but  they  were 
nut  wholly  free  from  the  limitations  of  their  times. 

Such  are  some  of  the  facts.  The  sphere  in  which  they 
lie  is  not  that  of  revelation.  They  belong  to  the  circum- 
ference, not  to  the  centre.  Judged  by  every  true  criterion 
they  are  unimportant.  They  do  not  contradict  inspiration. 
Rather  they  are  limitations  incidental  to  inspiration.  But 
they  are  facts,  and  facts  are  sacred  things,  which  no  man 
may  lightly  tamper  with.  We  must  accept  them  and  find 
a  place  for  them  in  our  doctrine  of  inspiration.  They 
are  like  the  nettle  which  stings  and  wounds  when  it  is 
handled  gingerly  but  is  harmless  when  grasped  witli  a 
strong  hand.  For  my  part,  I  do  not  regard  them  as  diffi- 
culties in  the  way  of  the  Bible,  but  rather  as  recommenda- 
tions to  its  acceptance.  I  can  see  how  the  Bible  can  much 
better  accomplish  its  purpose  by  not  offering  us  infalli- 
bility in  non-essentials,  how  thus  God  has  made  it  a  more 
liuman  and  intelligible  book,  and  lias  guarded  us  against 
that  worship  of  the  letter  which  blinds  men  to  the  Spirit. 

In  conclusion,  a  single  word  about  biblical  criticism.  It 
is  right  that  Christian  scholarship  should  revei'ently  sub- 
ject the  Bible  to  its  tests.  The  Bible  is  not  like  the  ark 
of  the  Lord  which  no  unconsecrated  hand  might  touch. 
It  is  the  human  book  made  for  everyday  use,  a  book  which 
God  has  not  been  afraid  to  put  alongside  of  other  books 
where  it  might  be  freely  subjected  to  the  test  of  the  sur- 
vival of  the  fittest.  There  is  a  certain  sensitiveness,  which 
has  its  origin  in  right  and  true  feelings,  about  treating  the 
Bible  like  other  books  by  inquiries  into  its  origin  and  his- 
tory and  efforts  to  unravel  the  problems  of  its  composi- 
tion. But  biblical  scholarship,  while  it  has  been  used  in 
the  interests  of  unbelief,  has  been  of  untold  benefit  to 


INSPIRATION  109 

the  Christian  church.  It  has  given  to  faith  some  of  its 
strongest  supports,  and  it  is  steadily  increasing  our  knowl- 
edge of  divine  truth.  Wherever  there  are  facts  there 
must  be  science.  If  God  is  a  reality,  we  have  a  right  to 
learn  more  of  His  person  and  His  nature  by  every  method 
which  the  resources  of  science  supply.  And  if  the  Bible 
is  a  book  at  once  divine  and  human,  it  must  offer  to  a 
reverent  science  one  of  the  most  inviting  and  fruitful 
fields  for  research.  Let  us  have  faith  in  the  old  Bible. 
It  is  not  so  weak  that  we  need  fear  it  will  get  broken  in 
the  testing.  We  need  not  be  afi'aid  to  subject  it  to  the 
most  vigorous  tests.  It  is  like  the  pure  gold  that  will 
come  out  of  the  fire  and  from  under  the  hammer  unin- 
jured. Much  of  the  disquietude  which  is  felt  in  our 
times  respecting  the  work  of  biblical  criticism  arises  from 
a  tacit  and  unconfessed  distrust  in  the  Bible.  And  it 
will  disappear  when  Christians  come  to  see  that  the  very 
methods  which  at  first  alarm  them  are  leading  to  the  com- 
plete and  invincible  proof  of  the  truth  and  unfailing  effi- 
cacy of  the  sacred  Book. 


VII. 

THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 

We  have  reached  the  point  where  vre  pass  from  those 
preliminary  topics  wliich  constitute  what  is  called  Funda- 
mental Theology  to  the  system  of  Christian  doctrine  or 
Systematic  Theology,  As  we  enter  the  new  region,  we 
seek  some  general  truth  which  shall  be  to  lis  at  once  a 
starting-point  and  a  guide  for  our  future  investigations. 
This  truth  we  find  in  the  doctrine  of  the  Kingdom  of 
God.  In  our  Saviour's  teachings  the  kingdom  M^as  made 
of  prime  importance.  He  began  his  ministry  with  the 
proclamation,  "  The  kingdom  of  God  is  at  hand  !  "  (Mark 
i.  15).  It  was  through  this  truth  that  he  linked  his  mes- 
sage with  the  teachings  of  the  Old  Testament.  His  pub- 
lic addresses  were  largely  occupied  with  expounding  the 
nature  of  the  kingdom.  His  prophecies  had. reference  to 
its  ultimate  triumph.  The  doctrine  of  the  kingdom  is 
the  doctrine  in  which  the  teachings  of  the  Scripture  find 
their  common  center.  The  same  may  be  said  of  the  system 
of  Christian  truth.  If  I  were  asked  what  lias  been  the 
greatest  achievement  of  recent  theology,  I  should  say  that 
it  was  the  revival  of  this  doctrine  of  the  kingdom  and  its 
restoration  to  its  proper  place  in  the  theological  system. 
And  not  only  in  systematic  theology  has  the  prominence 
given  to  this  truth  in  recent  times  been  important.  It 
has  worked  with  fruitful  results  in  the  departments  of 
Christian  ethics,  of  Church  history,  and  of  practical  theol- 
ogy, I  have  no  doubt  that  when  the  Christian  cliurch 
once  begins  to  realize  the  meaning  and  importance  of  this 


THE   KINGDOM   OF   GOD  111 

great  trntli  and  fact  of  the  kingdom,  with  all  that  is  in- 
volved in  it,  a  new  era  will  dawn  upon  it.  And  the  in- 
dividual Christian  also  needs  to  understand  this  truth, 
which  above  all  others  has  the  power  to  lift  men  out  of 
their  seliishness  and  isolation  into  their  true  relation  to 
God  and  Christ  and  their  fellow-men.  It  is  the  germinal 
doctrine  which  holds  in  its  bosom  the  potency  and  prom- 
ise of  all  the  rest.  The  man  who  imderstands  the  king- 
dom of  God  will  understand  all  that  is  essential  in  the  doc- 
trines of  Christ,  the  atonement.  Justification  by  faith,  the 
new  life,  the  last  things — in  a  word,  the  system  of  Chi'is- 
tian  truth. 

Let  us  pass  to  the  examination  of  this  great  doctrine. 

I.  We  ask,  what  is  the  meaning  of  the  term  kingdom 
of  God.  Our  Saviour  has  given  us  a  description,  which 
is  to  all  intents  and  purposes  a  definition,  in  the  petitions 
which  he  taught  his  disciples  to  pray,  "  Thy  kingdom 
come.  Thy  will  be  done  on  earth  as  it  is  in  heaven." 
The  latter  petition  is  explanatory  of  the  former.  The 
kingdom  consists  in  the  doing  of  God's  will  on  earth  as  it 
is  done  in  heaven  ;  it  comes  just  in  proportion  as  this  re- 
sult is  attained.  The  idea  of  the  kingdom  implies  three 
things,  a  world  of  sin,  an  ideal  of  perfection,  and  a  reali- 
zation of  this  ideal  in  the  world  by  means  of  redemption. 

It  implies  a  world  of  sin.  Sin  is  the  patent  fact,  which 
we  need  no  Bible  to  tell  us  of.  Here  it  is,  and  here  it 
has  been  from  the  beginning  of  human  history.  Its  ex- 
istence is  presupposed  in  all  the  teachings  of  the  Script- 
ure. That  great  problem  which  has  perplexed  religious 
and  philosophical  thought  in  all  ages,  the  origin  of  evil, 
is  discussed  only  incidentally  and  with  no  attempt  at  a 
complete  solution.  The  divine  eternal  plan  is  represented 
as  assuming  the  future  existence  of  sin  in  the  M^orld,  and 
as  providing  for  it  in  creation,  providence,  and  redemption. 
God  determined  to  permit  the  sin,  into  which  he  knew 
that  men  would  fall  of  their  own  free  will.     Certainly  it 


113  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

was  not  because  he  did  not  hate  it.  And  liowever  we  are 
to  explain  His  reasons,  He  meant  to  overrule  sin  for  good  ; 
may  we  not  reverently  say,  for  a  higher  good  than  could 
be  attained  without  it  ?  At  any  rate,  God's  plan  of  the 
kingdom  from  tlie  first  presupposed  the  existence  of  sin. 
Men  are  fallen,  alienated  from  God.  They  rest  under  His 
condemnation.  They  have  lost  their  rights  and  privileges 
as  children  of  God,  those  birthright  prerogatives  which 
belong  to  them  in  virtue  of  their  creation  in  the  divine 
image.  Human  society  in  all  its  ramification  is  permeated 
with  sin.  Its  institutions  all  are  tainted  with  it.  The 
world  is  full  of  misery  and  suffering,  the  effects  and  the 
punishment  of  sin.  The  human  body  has  become  subject 
to  death  and  disease.  Even  material  nature  has  caught 
the  contagion  and  groans  and  travails  in  pain.  Beyond 
the  death-line  there  are  tokens  of  worse  evils  and  retribu- 
tions in  the  other  world  as  the  result  of  sin.  It  is  a  lost 
world. 

The  kingdom  of  God  implies  the  existence  of  an  ideal 
of  perfection.  It  is  the  peculiarity  of  man  that  he  is  pos- 
sessed of  ideals.  He  has  caught  the  secret  of  his  true 
being,  though  he  may  not  know  how  to  become  what  he 
knows  he  was  made  to  be.  The  evolutionists  who  explain 
the  higher  attributes  of  the  human  soul  by  their  theory 
have  no  explanation  to  give  of  the  existence  in  the  soul 
of  an  ideal.  If  man  has  come  from  below,  how  has  he 
discovered  what  lies  beyond  ?  Why  is  it  that  he  keeps 
asserting  for  himself  kingly  rights,  though  he  has  never 
had  a  sceptre  in  his  hand  ?  What  right  have  men  like 
Herbert  Spencer  to  forestall  the  future  progress  of  the 
race  by  telling  us  of  what  is  to  be  when  man  is  perfectly 
evolved  ?  How  do  we  know,  upon  their  principles,  that 
man  is  not  already  fully  evolved  ?  According  to  the  evo- 
lutionists sin  is  natural,  it  belongs  to  the  stage  of  devel- 
opment which  man  has  reached.  Why,  then,  prate  of 
a  coming  time,  when  moi-al  perfection  is  to  be  attained  by 


THE   KINGDOM   OF   GOD  113 

the  individual  and  society?  Only  theism  can  give  ns  the 
key  to  the  existence  of  human  ideals  ;  and  only  Christianity 
can  take  the  key  and  open  the  lock.  Man  was  made  like 
God  and  for  God.  The  law  of  love  to  God  and  man,  to 
which  every  conscience  gives  more  or  less  distinct  witness, 
is  the  true  law  of  man's  being.  The  sinful  oi-der  of 
things  is  wrong  ;  it  ought  not  to  be.  Christianity  reveals 
the  higher  order.  The  ideal  of  humanity  is  not  an  im- 
agination, but  a  reality.  There  is  one  realm  of  the  uni- 
verse where  intelligent,  moral,  spiritual  beings,  like  our- 
selves, live  and  are  what  they  ought  to  be.  Heaven  is  the 
ideal  actualized.  There  God's  will  is  done,  freely,  cheer- 
fully, fully.  The  holy  beings  are  in  perfect  communion 
with  God.  His  law  is  written  on  their  hearts.  They  are 
not  so  much  subjects  as  children.  They  stand  in  right 
relations  with  each  other.  Doubtless  they  are  in  riglit  re- 
lations with  the  material  world. 

And  then,  the  kingdom  implies  a  process  of  redemption 
]»y  which  the  ideal  is  to  be  realized  in  the  world.  We 
can  conceive  of  the  kingdom  without  redemption.  In  the 
heavenly  state  the  kingdom  has  been  present  since  the 
creation.  It  needs  not  to  come,  for  it  is  always  present. 
But  the  kingdom,  so  far  as  we  are  concerned  with  it,  is  a 
kingdom  that  is  to  come  in  a  world  of  sin.  The  only 
way  in  which  it  can  thus  come  is  by  redemption.  This 
has  been  God's  plan  from  the  first.  We  often  speak  of 
redemption  as  if  it  were  an  afterthought  on  the  part  of 
God.  But  it  is  not  so  represented  in  the  Scripture.  The 
sacred  writers  go  into  none  of  those  harmless  but  useless 
speculations  with  which  theologians  occupy  themselves,  as 
to  what  would  have  been  the  state  of  things  if  man  had 
not  sinned,  whether  the  Son  would  have  become  incarnate 
and  the  like.  God  was  in  no  doubt  as  to  what  was  to  be. 
From  the  first  redemption  was  in  His  thought.  Tlie 
world  was  created  by  Christ  and  for  Christ.  Believers 
were  chosen  in  him  before  the  foundation  of  the  world. 


114  PRESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

The  kingdom  that  was  to  be  established  was  a  redemptive 
kingdom.  Men  were  to  be  rescued  from  sin  and  restored 
to  sonship.  The  will  of  God  was  to  be  done.  All  the 
ravages  of  sin  were  to  be  repaired.  The  earth  was  to  be 
made  like  Heaven.  And  as  far  as  the  kingdom  has  ad- 
vanced it  has  been  through  a  redemptive  process  realiz- 
ing the  heavenly  ideal  in  the  sinful  world.  We  some- 
times represent  the  progress  of  Christianity  by  a  map  upon 
which  the  countries  where  heathen  beliefs  prevail  nppear 
in  deep  shadow,  while  the  Christian  lands  are  in  the  light. 
To  those  who  have  watched  the  process  from  the  heaven- 
ly state,  the  history  of  the  world  has  been  the  slow  pass- 
ing of  an  eclipse,  the  steady  conquest  of  the  light  over 
the  darkness.  Wherever  sin  remains  and  men  are  unre- 
deemed there  is  deep  shadow,  wherever  God's  will  is  done 
the  victorious  light. 

II.  Xext  consider  the  founding  of  the  kingdom. 

Our  Saviour  began  his  ministry,  as  has  been  already 
noticed,  with  the  proclamation  that  the  kingdom  of  God 
was  at  hand.  How  are  we  to  understand  his  words  ?  Did 
the  kingdom  then  for  the  first  time  enter  the  world  ? 
We  often  speak  as  if  this  were  the  case  and  call  the  Sav- 
iour's work  the  founding  of  the  kingdom.  But  we  must 
beware  that  we  do  not  fall  into  eri'or  through  lack  of 
careful  discrimination.  If  the  kingdom  of  God  exists 
wherever  His  will  is  done,  then  it  must  have  existed  from 
the  beginning  of  human  history.  Redemption  began  with 
the  Fall.  From  the  days  of  Adam  there  has  been  a  god- 
ly race,  always  some  few  men  who  walked  with  God  and 
lived  in  the  light.  In  this  way  of  looking  at  it,  the  king- 
dom did  not  first  enter  the  world  when  Christ  came. 
And  yet  his  words  were  true.  The  kingdom  comes  with 
greater  and  greater  fulness.  It  came  when  redemption 
began  its  work  among  men,  when  Adam  and  Eve  left 
their  Paradise  with  nothing  of  comfort  or  hope  but  God's 
promise.     It  came  in  a  far  truer  and  higher  sense  when 


THE   KINGDOM   OF   GOD  115 

Jesiia  Christ  performed  his  redemptive  work.  In  its 
highest  and  fullest  sense  it  is  still  to  come  when  Christ 
shall  return  in  glory  at  the  Last  Day.  We  distinguish  a 
preparatory  stage,  a  work  of  foundation-laying,  the  prog- 
ress of  the  fully  equipped  and  advancing  kingdom,  and 
the  final  consummation. 

The  period  of  the  Old  Dispensation  was  the  prepar- 
atory stage.  First  the  kingdom  was  realized,  partially 
and  incompletely  in  individual  and  family  life.  There 
was  no  organized  dominion  of  God,  no  commonwealth  in 
which  His  rule  was  outwardly  expressed.  There  were 
those  who  held  allegiance  to  God,  but  they  were  scattered 
and  disunited.  Then  came  the  founding  of  the  nation  of 
Israel.  God  chose  a  people  to  be  the  recipients  of  His 
grace  and  the  instruments  of  Ilis  will.  They  were  bound 
to  Him  in  solemn  covenant.  He  was  their  King  and  they 
His  subjects  and  children.  Here  was  an  organized  rule  of 
God.  In  the  Theocracy,  with  its  religious  and  political 
institutions,  the  kingdom  found  a  more  perfect  realization. 
But  still  it  was  far  from  complete.  The  Theocracy  was 
always  short  of  its  ideal.  And  its  ideal  was  not  the  high- 
est. It  was  but  an  external  fulfilment,  at  the  best,  of  the 
idea  of  the  kingdom.  Its  law  was  adapted  to  a  compar- 
atively low  stage  of  religious  progress.  Its  institutions 
were  temporary  and  imperfect.  Its  prophets,  priests,  and 
kings  failed  to  perform  the  work  that  was  committed 
to  them.  Everything  was  educational  and  preparatory. 
This  was  the  time  when  prophecy  revealed  the  fact  that 
the  true  kingdom  of  God  lay  in  the  future,  that  it  was  a 
spiritual  kingdom,  that  it  was  to  include  all  mankind,  that 
the  Messiah  was  to  be  its  King  and  that  it  was  to  be 
based  upon  his  redemptive  work. 

The  foundation  of  the  kingdom,  in  the  full  meaning  of 
the  term,  was  laid  by  Jesus  Christ,  the  incarnate  Son  of 
God.  He  taught  mankind  what  the  kingdom  is,  in  all 
the  depth  of  spiritual  meaning  which  belongs  to  the  idea. 


116  PRESENT   DA.Y   THEOLOGY 

In  ]iis  own  person  the  kingdom  was  for  once  fully  realized 
on  earth,  lie  did  God's  will  perfectly.  In  his  person 
heaven  was  brought  down  to  earth  and  the  prayer  he 
taught  his  disciples  answered.  His  atoning  death,  by 
which  it  became  morally  possible  for  the  holy  God  to  for- 
give human  sin  and  receive  the  sinner  back  to  His  fellow- 
ship, was  in  the  deepest  sense  the  foundation-laying  of 
the  kingdom.  Retroactive  as  well  as  prospective  in  its 
efficacy,  Christ's  sacrifice  was  essential  to  the  verj'  exist- 
ence of  the  kingdom  on  earth.  His  resurrection  com- 
pleted the  work. 

The  actual  work  of  the  kingdom,  in  its  full  potency 
and  meaning,  began  when  Jesus  the  Christ,  the  God- 
man,  who  died  and  rose  again,  ascended  into  heaven 
and  sat  down  as  King  upon  his  Father's  throne,  and 
when  he  sent  his  Spirit  to  found  the  church  on  earth. 
Thenceforward  the  kingdom  was  fully  realized,  not  as 
yet  indeed  in  extension  but  already  in  quality.  The 
kingdom  had  come.  The  true  reign  of  God  had 
begun. 

And  yet  we  still  pray.  Thy  kingdom  come  !  the  process 
is  slow,  the  work  of  redemption  is  gradual.  We  wait  for 
that  second  coming  of  the  Lord  when  the  kingdom  shall 
be  realized  in  its  completeness,  when  the  earth  shall  be 
the  Lord's,  and  when  at  the  name  of  Jesus  every  knee 
shall  bow,  of  things  in  heaven  and  things  in  earth,  and 
things  under  the  earth,  and  every  tongue  confess  that 
Jesus  Christ  is  Lord,  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father 
(Phil.  ii.  10,  11). 

III.  The  organization  of  the  kingdom  is  the  next  point 
which  demands  our  attention.  The  kingdom  is  not  merely 
the  union  of  good  men  on  earth  in  common  loyalty  to 
truth  and  dut3^  It  is  not  merely  Christianity  working  by 
its  self -propagating  power.  It  is  a  union  of  God  and  men. 
It  is  not  an  earthlj'  order  of  tilings  but  a  heavenly  order. 
Its  lieadquarters  are  in  heaven  though  its  work  is  on  earth. 


THE   KINGDOM   OF   GOD  117 

It  is  the  union  of  heaven  and  earth,  of  the  things  unseen 
and  eternal  with  the  things  seen  and  tenipoi'al.  It  is  a 
great  living  palpitating  oi'ganisni,  every  part  instinct  with 
vitality. 

At  its  head  is  God  reigning  through  Christ  His  Son. 
He  is  the  living  God,  omnipresent,  everywhere  active,  the 
God  whose  power  supports  and  governs  the  whole  uni- 
verse, material  and  sentient.  So  far  as  we  know,  the  es- 
tablishment of  the  kingdom  here  is  His  gi-eat  end.  If 
there  are  other  ends  dearer  to  Him,  they  have  not  been 
revealed  to  us.  Natural  theology,  as  well  as  Sci'ipture, 
reveals  to  us  the  providential  government  of  God.  This 
is  not  the  same  as  His  government  in  His  kingdom.  The 
former  extends  to  all  creatures,  inanimate  and  animate, 
good  and  evil,  alike;  the  latter  is  confined  to  those  who 
freely  and  gladly  accept  His  sway.  But  the  providential 
government  of  God  finds  its  chief  end  in  the  establish- 
ment of  His  kingdom.  The  God  of  grace  is  the  God  of 
nature.  He  guides  all  things,  the  ongoing  of  natuie,  the 
movements  of  society,  the  lives  of  individuals,  with  refer- 
ence to  the  kingdom.  Christ  the  divinely  human  King  is 
on  the  throne.  A  member  of  the  human  race  holds  the 
reins  of  providence,  and  all  things  work  together  for  good 
to  them  that  love  God  (Rom.  viii.  28).  And  God  and 
Christ  stand  in  personal  communion  with  the  members  of 
the  kingdom  through  the  Holy  Spirit.  Not  more  real  is 
the  intercourse  of  man  with  man  than  the  intercourse  of 
God  and  Christ  with  their  fellow-laborers  on  earth.  There 
are  earthly  governments  that  make  themselves  felt  every- 
where throughout  their  domains.  No  village  so  small,  no 
house  so  remote,  that  the  power  of  the  king  is  not  known, 
and  loved  or  feared  or  hated.  But  such  an  illustration 
can  give  us  but  the  feeblest  idea  of  the  presence  and 
activity  of  God  in  His  kingdom.  However  insignificant 
a  Christian  may  be,  if  he  is  a  true  son  of  the  kingdom,  all 
the  power  of  God  is  enlisted  in  his  behalf  and  the  Ora- 


118  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

iiipoteiit  is  nearer  to  him  than  his  closest  friend,  so  that 
it  is  no  wonder 

"Satan  trembles  wlieu  lie  sees 
The  weakest  saint  upon  bis  knees." 

Associated  with  God  and  Christ  in  the  organization  of 
the  kingdom  are  the  holy  angels.  What  other  interests 
these  pure  and  beautiful  beings  may  have  we  do  not  know. 
Only  one  thing  has  been  revealed  to  us,  their  connection 
with  the  establishment  of  God's  kingdom  on  earth.  The 
author  of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  asks,  "  Are  they  not 
all  ministering  spirits,  sent  forth  to  minister  for  them  who 
shall  be  heirs  of  salvation  ? "  (tleb.  i.  14).  Our  Saviour 
tells  us  that  there  is  joy  in  heaven  over  one  sinner  that 
repenteth  (Luke  xv.  7,  10).  With  the  angels  in  the  bless- 
edness of  heaven  are  the  souls  of  those  who  have  passed 
from  the  Church  Militant  to  the  Church  Triumphant,  the 
spirits  of  the  just  made  perfect,  who  hover  over  us,  a  great 
cloud  of  witnesses  watching  us  as  we  run  the  race  set  be- 
fore us  (Heb.  xii,  1). 

Finally,  all  good  men  belong  to  this  goodly  fellow- 
ship of  the  kingdom.  They  form  one  great  brotherhood, 
through  which  that  liberty,  equality,  and  fraternity  which 
has  been  the  dream  of  earnest  men  in  all  ages  is  to  be  re- 
alized. This  is  the  true  tie  that  binds  men  together,  the 
one  tie  that  can  never  be  broken.  We  do  not  begin  to 
realize  it.  We  do  not  see  the  invisible  bonds  that  unite 
us  to  every  true  Christian  the  world  over.  But  they  are 
there  all  the  same,  and  by  and  by  we  shall  understand  it. 

IV.  Let  us  look  more  carefully  at  the  nature  of  the 
kingdom. 

It  is  entered  by  the  new  birth.  The  sinful  will  cannot 
turn  itself  to  God.  It  must  have  divine  help.  There 
must  be  forgiveness.  The  whole  heart  must  be  changed. 
Life  has  to  receive  a  new  direction.     This  can  be  accom- 


THE   KINGDOM   OF   GOD  119 

plislied  only  through  faith  in  Christ  who  has  made  atone- 
ment for  our  sins  and  by  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Jesus  said  with  an  emphasis  which  left  no  room  for  mis- 
understanding, "  Verily,  verily,  I  say  nnto  thee,  Except  a 
man  be  born  again,  he  cannot  see  the  kingdom  of  God  " 
(John  iii.  3).  Thus  only  can  the  sinner  become  a  child 
of  God  and  an  heir  of  the  eternal  inheritance.  This  is 
the  first  great  doing  of  the  will  of  God.  It  opens  the  way 
for  the  higher  and  fuller  doing  of  that  will  in  the  pro- 
gressive sanctification  of  the  Christian  life  and  in  the  ser- 
vice of  God  in  the  tasks  of  the  kingdom. 

The  progressive  nature  of  the  kingdom  has  already 
been  referred  to.  But  it  needs  to  be  strongly  empha- 
sized. Christ  likened  the  kingdom  to  the  seed  and  the 
leaven.  It  is  its  nature  to  propagate  itself,  to  spread 
from  man  to  man,  from  nation  to  nation,  from  institu- 
tion to  institution  of  society.  Because  the  divine  life 
works  in  it,  it  cannot  remain  stationary.  It  passes  from 
stage  to  stage  of  growth,  from  insignificant  germs  to 
generous  blossoming  and  splendid  fruitage.  From  the 
feebleness  of  the  Apostolic  church  to  the  present  extent 
and  strength  of  Christendom  its  movement  has  been 
steadily  onward.  There  have  been,  indeed,  periods  of 
apparent  retrogression,  but  they  have  been  like  the  re- 
cession of  the  waves  upon  the  beach  as  the  tide  comes  in, 
a  gathering  of  strength  for  a  new  advance. 

Again,  the  kingdom  is  spiritual.  When  Pilate  ques- 
tioned Jesus  as  to  the  nature  of  his  royal  office  as  the 
Messiah,  his  answer  was,  "  My  kingdom  is  not  of  this 
world"  (John  xviii.  36).  As  we  have  seen,  its  object  is 
to  bring  heavenly  principles  into  earthly  affairs.  To  the 
Pharisees  who  were  looking  for  a  political  redemption 
Jesus  said,  "  The  kingdom  of  God  cometh  not  with  ob- 
servation :  neither  shall  they  say,  Lo,  here !  or,  There  ! 
for  lo,  the  kingdom  of  God  is  within  you  "  (Luke  xvii. 
20,  21).     It  begins  in  tho  soul  and  works  outward.     It 


120  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

aims  to  transform  the  world  by  the  power  of  the  truth 
and  the  invisible  working  of  the  Spirit  of  God.  It  es- 
chews all  recourse  to  brute  force.  God  respects  the  free- 
dom of  the  will  which  he  has  made.  lie  will  have  volun- 
tary and  cheerful  service  or  none  at  all.  By  this  test  we 
can  discover  the  difference  between  the  kingdom  and 
those  false  imitations  of  it  which  men  set  up.  The  Rom- 
ish system  has  claimed  that  the  kingdom  of  God  and 
the  church  of  Rome  are  identical,  but  it  has  given  the 
lie  to  its  claim  by  its  use  of  earthly  power  to  advance  the 
kingdom,  by  its  claim  to  temporal  dominion,  by  its  perse- 
cutions, by  its  denials  of  the  j'ights  of  conscience. 

Once  more,  the  law  of  the  kingdom  is  the  law  of  love. 
In  love  to  God  and  love  to  our  fellow-men  the  divine  will 
finds  its  fulfilment.  This  is  the  law  which  God  Himself 
follows.  When  He  makes  it  the  rule  for  men.  He  calls 
on  them  to  become  like  Himself.  "  God  is  love;  and  he 
that  dwelleth  in  love  dw'elleth  in  God  and  God  in  him  " 
(1  John  iv.  16).  Love  is  the  communication  of  self  to 
others.  In  its  highest  exercise,  as  we  know  it  in  the  re- 
demptive work  of  Christ,  it  is  self-denial  or  self-saciifice. 
Service  is  the  essence  of  love.  "  Whosoever  will  be  great 
among  you,  let  him  be  your  minister ;  and  whosoever  will 
be  chief  among  you,  let  him  be  your  servant ;  even  as 
the  Son  of  man  came  not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to 
minister,  and  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for  many  "  (Matt. 
XX.  26-28). 

V.  Kext  consider  the  agencies  which  God  employs  in 
the  establishment  of  the  kingdom.  Here  we  are  met  by 
the  remarkable  fact  that  while  the  whole  enginery  of  di- 
vine power  in  providence  and  redemption  is  enlisted  in 
behalf  of  the  kingdom,  yet  God  has  so  arranged  things 
that  the  work  is  done  by  men.  God's  plan  from  the  first 
has  been  the  salvation  of  man  by  men.  In  all  His  le- 
demptive  efficiency  he  has  used  human  instruments,  indi- 
viduals and  nations.     Here  lies  the  explanation  of  the  in- 


THE   KINGDOM   OF   GOD  121 

carnation.  The  Word  was  made  flesh  that  the  Saviour 
might  be  a  man.  To-daj  a  Man  sits  upon  the  throne  of 
the  universe  and  wields  the  sceptre  of  universal  powei". 

We  mark,  however,  a  difference  between  the  earlier 
and  later  stages  of  the  kingdom's  history.  During  the 
periods  of  preparation  and  foundation-laying,  and  during 
the  first  age  of  the  Christian  Dispensation,  God  employed 
supernatural  means  in  the  great  work.  This  was  needful 
in  the  first  introduction  of  the  redemptive  revelation  and 
the  first  establishment  of  the  machinery  of  the  kingdom. 
Inspiration,  miracles,  and  the  other  supernatui-al  agencies 
served  to  give  the  kingdom  a  foothold  in  the  hearts  of 
God's  chosen  ones  who  were  to  go  forth  and  scatter  the 
gospel  seed  broadcast  in  the  world.  But  when  the  initial 
establishment  of  the  kingdom  was  thus  effected,  the  su- 
pernatural means  became  unnecessary.  For  God  works 
as  ti'uly  and  effectively  through  second  causes  as  when  He 
sees  fit  in  part  or  wholly  to  dispense  with  them,  and  the 
supernatural  or  miraculous,  in  the  sense  in  which  we  are 
using  the  terms,  is  always  employed  with  a  wise  economy. 
God  now  employs  only  natural  agencies,  through  w^hich 
His  divine  power  works,  and  by  which  He  accomplishes 
His  purposes  of  grace.  Let  me  repeat:  God  is  as  truly 
present  in  the  natural  as  in  the  supernatural.  The  Holy 
Spirit  is  as  really  active  in  the  Christian  to-day,  though 
subject  only  to  His  ordinary  and  normal  influences,  as  in 
the  inspired  prophet  or  apostle  eighteen  hundred  or  three 
thousand  years  ago.  And  redemption  is  as  truly  a  divine 
work  when  it  is  accomplished  through  the  permanent  and 
constantly  efficient  operations  of  God's  grace,  as  when  it 
employs  a  miracle  to  reach  its  end. 

God  has  not  only  committed  the  woi-k  of  the  kingdom 
to  individual  Christians ;  he  has  also  established  certain 
great  corporate  agencies  or  institutions,  in  which  individ- 
ual Christians  unite,  and  through  which  they  accomplish 
their  special  tasks.     These  are  what  are  sometimes  called 


122  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

the  great  "  teleological  organs"  of  liutDau  society.  First 
among  them  may  be  placed  tlie  Family  and  the  Church. 
So  important  are  both,  and  so  vitally  essential  to  the  pro- 
gress of  the  kingdom  that  one  is  at  a  loss  to  whicli  to  give 
the  precedence.  The  family  is  the  oldest  and  most  funda- 
mental. It  is  most  closely  connected  with  the  beginnings 
and  decisive  developments  of  moral  and  religious  life. 
God  lionored  it  by  making  it  the  basis  of  the  primitive 
covenant  in  wliich  the  redemptive  work  of  the  kingdom 
began.  In  all  ages  the  success  of  the  kingdom  has  largely 
depended  upon  whether  the  family  has  been  true  to  the 
great  end  for  which  it  was  established.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  church  is  the  distinctively  religious  institution. 
It  was  most  closely  connected  with  the  work  of  Christ. 
It  is  more  exclusively  devoted  to  the  advancement  of  the 
kingdom  through  the  preaching  and  teaching  of  the  Gos- 
pel. The  church  is  often  identilied  with  the  kingdom  of 
God.  But  this  is  to  wholly  misapprehend  it.  It  is  no 
more  identical  with  the  kingdom  than  is  the  family.  It 
is  true  that  the  members  of  what  we  not  very  happily 
call  the  invisible  church  are  the  same  as  the  subjects  of 
the  kingdom.  But  there  the  resemblance  ends.  The 
two  stand  teleologically  connected.  The  kingdom  is  the 
end,  and  the  church  a  means  to  that  end ;  and  it  is  only 
one  means,  though  in  some  respects  the  most  important, 
alongside  of  a  number  of  others.  We  cannot  use  the 
two  terras  indiscriminately  without  falling  into  confusion. 
Test  it  by  saying,  "  Thy  church  come  !  "  instead  of  "  Thy 
kingdom  come  !  "  Here  are  two  altogether  different  ideas. 
Still  another  of  these  corporate  agencies,  established 
for  the  advancement  of  the  kingdom,  is  the  State.  Our 
secularized  modern  governments  are  so  disjoined  from 
the  true  ends  which  they  should  subserve  that  we  do  not 
readily  recognize  the  ideal.  Yet  there  can  be  no  doubt 
in  a  Christian  mind  that  the  state  receives  its  authority 
from  God,  the  universal  King,  and  that  it  holds  it  only 


THE   KINGDOM    OF   GOD  123 

for  the  purpose  of  prouiotiiig  the  interests  of  the  king- 
dom. 

After  these  three  great  institutions  come  a  number  of 
subordinate  jet  scarcely  less  important  agencies,  labor, 
commerce,  the  trades  and  pi-ofessions,  science,  art,  litera- 
ture. If  they  are  largely  used  in  the  interests  of  sin,  this 
is  their  abuse  and  not  their  true  function.  They  derive 
their  importance  from  their  relation  as  means  to  the  king- 
dom as  an  end,  and  the  great  work  of  redemption  will 
not  be  complete  till  they  have  been  consecrated  to  their 
true  purpose.  And  meantime  the  work  of  the  individu- 
al Christian  will  be  effectual  in  proportion  to  his  under- 
standing of  the  relation  of  these  agencies  to  the  kingdom. 
How  much,  for  exaniple,  the  Christian  man  of  wealth  can 
do  when  he  realizes  that  God  has  given  him  his  proper- 
ty that  he  may  use  it  for  the  great  cause.  What  a  new 
aspect  science  assumes,  when  we  come  to  see  that  all  its 
discoveries  and  all  its  manifold  applications  to  the  useful 
arts  may  be  made  to  subserve  the  divine  purpose  of  re- 
demption. 

YI.  We  are  thus  prepared  to  understand  the  true  scope 
of  the  kingdom  and  the  future  that  lies  before  it.  While 
it  is,  as  we  have  seen,  a  spiritual  kingdom,  yet  it  takes  into 
its  comprehensive  embrace  all  human  interests.  It  be- 
gins with  the  individual  human  will  and  works  outward 
until,  like  the  leaven  in  the  mass,  it  has  penetrated  to 
the  circumference  of  humanity  and  even  to  the  sphei'e 
of  physical  nature.  Eedemption  will  not  be  accomplished 
until  all  the  consequences  of  the  Fall  have  been  repaired 
and  the  race  and  the  earth  itself  carried  forward  to  the  per- 
fection for  which  the  divine  purpose  destined  them.  Ac- 
cordingly, the  kingdom  comes  not  only  in  the  distinctive- 
ly religious  sphere,  but  also  in  that  which  we,  not  with  en- 
tire accuracy,  distinguish  as  the  secular.  The  distinctive- 
ly spiritual  redemption  ought  indeed  to  be  placed  first. 
But  we  cannot  stop  there.     The  kingdom  is  to  come  in 


124  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

the  regeneration  of  society,  in  all  its  institutions,  in  all 
its  coi'poiate  interests,  in  its  spirit  and  tone.  It  is  to  come 
in  the  redemption  of  the  human  body  from  disease 
and  the  dominion  of  death,  that  great  process  which  is 
to  be  consummated  by  the  resurrection.  It  is  to  come 
in  the  deliverance  of  nature  from  the  bondage  of  corrup- 
tion and  the  restoration  of  the  right  relations  between 
man  and  nature.  We  must,  therefore,  beware  of  too  nar- 
row a  view  of  the  kingdom.  We  may  not  confine  it  to 
the  things  of  the  church.  We  must  recognize  the  fact 
that  our  Lord  is  King  in  the  secular  sphere  as  truly  as  in 
the  religious,  and  that  in  this  view  nothing  is  common  or 
unclean.  The  true  Christianity  is  not  that  which  sepa- 
rates itself  from  the  world  and  selfishly  wraps  itself  in 
the  mantle  of  its  own  salvation,  but  that  which  goes  out 
into  the  world  in  the  spirit  of  the  Master,  to  win  it  and 
all  that  is  in  it  to  him.  Viewing  the  subject  thus,  we 
shall  see  that  the  kingdom  comes  not  only  in  the  additions 
of  converts  to  the  church  and  the  building  up  of  Chris- 
tians in  holy  living,  but  in  the  establishment  of  better 
principles  of  business,  in  the  equitable  settlement  of  the 
relation  between  capital  and  labor,  in  the  moral  reforms  by 
which  deep-seated  social  vices  or  abuses  are  overcome,  in 
the  elevation  of  politics,  in  the  advance  of  civilization,  in 
the  cessation  of  war,  in  improved  sanitary  arrangements 
in  our  cities,  even  in  the  prevention  of  cruelty  to  animals 
and  the  increasing  sense  of  obligation  to  avoid  waste  and 
needless  destruction  in  the  use  of  the  products  of  matei'ial 
nature.  The  Christian  who  grasps  the  conception  of  the 
kingdom  cannot  be  narrow-minded.  His  interests  are  as 
wide  as  the  earth  itself.  Perhaps  no  great  man  of 
modern  times  has  so  fully  comprehended  this  truth  as  the 
missionary  Livingstone.  When  he  turned  aside  from  the 
distinctively  religious  work  of  his  calling  to  explore  the 
unknown  interior  of  Africa,  there  were  many  to  criticise 
hiin  for  what  seemed  to  them  an  abandonment  of  the  ca- 


THE   KINGDOM   OF   GOD  125 

reer  to  which  lie  had  devoted  his  life.  His  profound 
words,  littered  appai-ently  without  a  thought  that  he  was 
saying  anything  great,  deserve  to  he  held  in  unfailing  re- 
membrance : 

"As  far  as  I  am  myself  concerned,  the  opening  of  the 
new  central  country  is  a  matter  for  congratulation  only  in 
so  far  as  it  opens  up  a  prospect  for  the  elevation  of  the 
inhabitants,  ...  I  view  the  end  of  the  geograph- 
ical feat  as  the  beginning  of  the  missionary  enterprise.  I 
take  the  latter  term  in  its  most  extended  signification,  and 
include  every  effort  made  for  the  amelioration  of  our 
race,  the  promotion  of  all  those  means  by  which  God  in 
His  providence  is  working,  and  bringing  all  His  dealings 
with  men  to  a  glorious  consummation.  Each  man  in  his 
sphere,  either  knowingly  or  unwittingly,  is  performing 
the  will  of  our  Father  in  Heaven.  Men  of  science,  search- 
ing .after  hidden  truths  which,  when  discovered,  will,  like 
the  electric  telegraph,  bind  men  more  closely  together,  sol- 
diers battling  for  the  right  against  tyranny,  sailors  rescu- 
ing the  victims  of  oppression  from  the  grasp  of  heartless 
men-stealers,  merchants  teaching  the  nations  lessons  of 
mutual  dependence,  and  many  others,  as  well  as  mission- 
aries, all  work  in  the  same  direction  and  all  efforts  are 
overruled  for  one  glorious  end  "  ("  Livingstone's  Travels," 
pp.  718-719). 

We  shall  not  forget  that  the  kingdom  of  God  is  to  be 
established  here  in  this  earth.  There  is  a  notion  of  the 
work  of  Christianity  which  always  is  more  or  less  preva- 
lent in  the  minds  of  those  who  hold  narrow  views  of  the 
kingdom,  that  represents  the  chief  or  only  aim  of  redemp- 
tion to  get  individual  souls  out  of  this  world  and  safe  into 
heaven.  But  this  is  not  the  biblical  view.  According  to 
the  Scriptures,  the  kingdom  is  to  come  here.  This  earth 
is  to  be  redeemed.  The  human  race  is  to  be  brought  to 
Christ  here.  The  chorus  of  praise  is  to  ascend  from  the 
voices  of  living  men  in  Asia  and  Africa  and  the  rest  of 
the  habitable  globe.     The  whole  thought  of  prophets  and 


126  PEESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

apostles  is  concentrated  upon  this  consummation.  To 
such  an  extent  is  this  the  case  that  they  pass  lightly  and 
with  great  silences  over  the  state  of  the  dead  between  the 
time  of  their  departure  from  this  world  and  the  Judo-- 
ment  Day,  The  glorious  hope  is  of  the  Second  Coming, 
which  is  a  coming  to  this  world  and  marks  the  consum- 
mation of  the  kingdom  here.  Here  the  kingdom  is  to  be 
established.  This  planet  and  the  living  races  on  it  are  to 
be  redeemed.  And  somehow  at  the  Last  Day  those  who 
have  entered  into  the  rest  of  the  heavenly  state  are  to  be 
brought  back  to  earth,  that  they  may  share  in  the  glory 
of  the  Saviour's  triumph.  On  every  side  the  question  is 
raised  in  our  age.  What  is  the  true  motive  of  Christian 
missions?  Is  it  the  doctrine  of  eternal  punishment?  Is 
it  the  command  of  Christ  ?  We  fear  lest  the  decision 
one  way  or  the  other  of  the  dispute  respecting  probation 
in  the  other  world  will  "  sever  the  nerve  of  missions." 
Yet  there  might  be  an  end  of  controversy  if  we  would 
only  understand  the  teachings  of  Christ  and  the  apostles 
on  the  subject  of  the  kingdom.  It  is  to  be  established 
here,  on  the  very  soil  which  sin  has  defiled.  The  dark 
shadow  is  to  be  lifted  and  the  planet  is  to  emerge  from 
its  moral  eclipse.  This  was  the  fact  that  underlay  the 
command  of  Christ.  To  bring  about  this  consummation 
is  the  task  of  every  Christian,  so  far  as  his  power  and  op- 
portunity go.  It  is  the  great  motive  of  the  Christian 
church.  It  is  the  great  motive  which  animates  God  and 
Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit. 

Moral  philosophy  in  all  ages  has  busied  itself  with  the 
quest  for  the  highest  good,  tlie  sumimnn  honum.  Tlie 
Christian  finds  it  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  "  Seek  je  first 
the  kingdom  of  God!"  (Matt.  vi.  33).  This  is  the 
"  chief  end  of  man,"  whether  Christian  or  unconverted. 
This  is  to  be  the  avowed  and  followed  aim  of  every  fol- 
lower of  Christ.  This  was  pre-eminently  the  Saviour's 
own  aim  while  he  was  on  earth.     This  is  what  gives  the 


THE   KINGDOM   OF   GOD  127 

kingdom  its  organic  unity  and  brings  God  and  all  good 
beings  into  one  through  the  Holy  Spirit. 

And  for  our  assurance  in  our  life  of  faith  and  labor  for 
God  we  have  the  promise  of  Jehovah  Himself  that  the 
great  end  shall  be  at  last  attained.  The  kingdom  shall 
come  in  its  perfection  of  gloiy  and  beauty.  Christ  shall 
be  acknowledged  as  King  of  kings  and  Lord  of  lords. 
And  we,  if  we  are  faithful,  shall  share  in  the  triumph. 
Our  earth,  the  dear  earth  we  love,  shall  be  once  more 
God's. 

I  say  to  thee,  do  thoti  repeat 

To  the  first  man  thou  mayest  meet, 

In  lane,  highway,  or  open  street, 

That  he,  and  we,  and  all  men  move 

Under  a  canopy  of  Love, 

As  broad  as  the  blue  sky  above  : 

That  doubt  and  trouble,  fear  and  pain, 
And  anguish,  all  are  shadows  vain ; 
That  death  itself  shall  not  remain  : 

That  weary  deserts  we  may  tread, 
A  dreary  labyrinth  may  thread, 
Through  dark  ways  underground  be  led  ; 

Yet,  if  one  Guide  we  will  obey. 
The  dreariest  path,  the  darkest  way, 
Shall  issue  out  in  heavenly  day ; 

And  we,  on  divers  shores  now  cast, 

Shall  meet,  our  perilous  voyage  past, 

All  in  our  Father's  home  at  last.  * 

And  ere  thou  leave  him,  say  thou  this : 
Yet  one  word  more, — they  only  miss 
The  winning  of  that  final  bliss 


128  PRESENT   DAY    THEOLOGY 

Who  will  not  count  it  true  that  Love, 
Blessing,  not  cursing,  rules  above, 
And  that  in  it  we  live  and  move. 

And  one  thing  further  make  him  know,^ 
That  to  believe  these  things  are  so, 
This  firm  faith  never  to  forego, 

Desjiite  of  all  which  seems  at  strife, 
With  blessing,  and  with  curses  rife. 
That  this  is  blessing,  this  is  life. 

KiCHAKD  ChENEVIX  TrENCH. 


VIIL 

JESUS   THE   CHRIST 

Henri  Taine,  speaking  of  the  difficulties  which  attend 
tlie  writing  of  history,  uses  the  following  language  :  "  For 
the  past  three  hundred  years  we  have  been  more  and  more 
losing  sight  of  things  in  their  full  and  complete  sense ; 
subject  to  the  constraints  of  a  domestic,  many-sided  and 
extended  education,  we  fix  our  attention  on  the  symbols 
of  objects  rather  than  on  the  objects  themselves ;  instead 
of  on  the  ground  itself,  on  a  map  of  it ;  instead  of  on 
animals  struggling  for  existence,  on  nomenclatures  and 
classifications,  or  at  best  on  stuffed  specimens  displayed 
in  a  museum ;  instead  of  on  men  who  feel  and  act,  on  sta- 
tistics, codes,  histories,  literatures,  and  philosophies ;  in 
short,  on  printed  words,  and  worse  still,  on  abstract  terms 
difficult  to  understand,  and  deceptive,  especially  in  all 
that  relates  to  human  life  and  society  "  ("  iJ^apoleon  Bo- 
naparte," New  Princeton  Review,  vol.  iii.,  p.  154). 

The  same  difficulties  are  encountered  by  the  theolo- 
gian. He  is  dealing  with  facts,  not  with  abstract  concep- 
tions, still  less  with  words.  He  moves  in  the  midst  of 
spiritual  realities,  whose  existence  is  as  certain  as  that  of 
continent  and  ocean,  mountain,  river,  and  forest.  But  he 
is  tempted  at  every  step  to  forget  his  facts  and  to  take  up 
instead  with  notions  or  words.  Especially  is  this  true  of 
the  great  fact  of  doctrine  which  now  comes  before  us — 
Jesus  the  Christ.  We  lose  ourselves  in  scholastic  discus- 
sions respecting  Christ's  person,  or  we  dwell  upon  the  his- 
tory of  his  earthly  career  until  we  forget  that  he  is  any- 
9 


130  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

thing  but  a  history.  And  yet  all  the  while  there  is  the 
living  Christ  himself  ruling  from  the  throne  of  the  uni- 
verse, active  everywhere  in  the  world  by  his  providence, 
and  dwelling  in  every  Christian  heart  through  liis  Spirit. 
He  is  the  fact  of  facts,  by  which  alone  the  world  and 
humanity  are  intelligible.  If  the  Christian  revelation  is 
in  any  true  sense  the  self-manifestation  of  God  which  it 
claims  to  be,  if  there  is  a  real  kingdom  of  God,  then  the 
presence  and  redemptive  efficiency  of  Christ  mean  every- 
thing. We  might  as  well  study  astronomy  and  forget 
that  there  is  a  sun,  or  physics  and  ignore  the  existence  of 
gravitation  and  heat  and  light  and  electricity,  as  to  study 
theology  and  forget  the  living  Christ,  the  same  yesterday, 
to-day,  and  forever. 

If,  therefore,  we  take  up  the  doctrine  of  Christ  histori- 
cally, and  discuss  those  doctrinal  formulas  by  which  the 
church  has  attempted  to  express  the  mystery  of  his  di- 
vinely human  person,  if  we  speculate  concerning  the  deep 
Christological  problems,  let  us  all  the  time  i-emember  that 
he  himself  is  here  to-day  with  us,  the  One  who  is  the  first 
and  the  last  and  the  Living  one,  who  was  dead  and  is  alive 
forevermore  (Rev.  i.  18).  Greater  than  our  theology, 
greater  than  all  our  doctrines  of  Christ  and  our  specula- 
tions about  him  is  the  Christ  himself. 


"  Our  little  systems  have  their  day  ; 

They  have  their  day  and  cease  to  be  ; 
They  are  but  broken  lights  of  thee, 
And  thou,  O  Lord,  art  more  than  they." 


I.  The  early  Christians  made  confession  of  their  faith 
in  the  brief  words,  Jesus  is  the  Christ.  What  did  these 
words  mean  ?  To  answer  the  question  we  must  go  back 
to  the  Old  Testament.  From  the  first  the  redemptive 
revelation  has  had  a  forward  look.     Attention  has  often 


JESUS   THE   CHEIST  131 

been  called  to  the  fact  that  while  the  heathen  nations  had 
their  Golden  Age  in  the  past,  the  Jew  looked  for  it  in  the 
future.  Everywhere  during  the  Old  Dispensation  we  dis- 
cover lines  running  up  in  the  direction  of  a  higher  revela- 
tion and  converging  in  a  personal  center. 

One  line  of  approach  to  the  Christ  is  through  the  Old 
Testament  mediators,  prophets,  priests,  and  kings,  who 
were  God's  instruments  in  making  His  redemptive  revela- 
tion. In  them  the  divine  Spirit  dwelt  as  an  endowment 
of  power  for  the  great  tasks  connected  with  that  revela- 
tion. "We  have  seen  in  a  previous  chapter  that  this  in- 
spiration was  an  anticipation  of  that  perfect  inspiration 
which  was  predicted  for  the  Messiah.  Still  another  line 
of  approach  is  through  the  theophanies  in  the  person  of 
the  Angel  of  Jehovah.  This  mysterious  Being,  who 
spoke  in  the  name  of  Jehovah  and  to  whom  divine  hon- 
ors were  paid,  appears  at  all  the  great  crises  of  Old  Testa- 
ment history — at  the  destruction  of  the  cities  of  the  Plain, 
at  the  announcement  of  Isaac's  birth,  at  the  moment  when 
Abraham  was  about  to  offer  up  his  son,  at  Penuel  where 
Jacob  wrestled  with  him,  at  the  burning  bnsh  when  the 
divine  call  was  given  to  Moses  (Gen.  xxii.  11,  12,  15, 
xxxi.  11,  13,  xxxii.  30,  Ex.  iii.  2,  4).  As  the  "  angel  of 
God's  presence  "  he  accompanied  the  Children  of  Israel  in 
their  journeyings  through  the  wilderness  (Ex.  xxxiii.  14  ; 
Is.  Ixiii.  9). 

Again,  everything  in  the  Old  Dispensation  tends  to- 
ward a  closer  and  closer  union  between  Jehovah  and  His 
people.  At  first  there  are  occasional  glimpses  of  the 
divine  glory,  as  when  God  appeared  to  Abraham  and 
Moses.  Then  there  is  the  constant  abiding  of  the  Shek- 
inah  in  the  holy  of  holies  of  the  tabernacle  and  the 
temple.  Then  come  the  predictions  of  the  "  coming  of 
Jehovah."  The  earth  was  to  see  in  a  sense  yet  unknown 
the  presence  and  glory  of  the  Lord.  The  mighty  God 
Himself  was  to  come,  bringing  judgment  to  the  wicked 


132  PRESENT   DAY    THEOLOGY 

and  redemption  to  His  people.  He  was  to  set  up  His 
kingdom  on  earth  and  dwell  forever  with  men  (Psalm 
xcviii.  9 ;  Is.  xxxv.  4,  xl.  3,  10). 

And  then,  most  important  of  all,  because  most  definitely 
pointing  to  the  Christ  that  was  to  appear,  is  the  prophecy 
of  the  Messiah,  the  anointed  King,  who  was  to  sit  upon 
the  throne  of  David  and  establish  the  kingdom  of  God. 
There  is  a  foreshadowing  of  him  in  the  first  vague  prom- 
ise to  our  fallen  parents  of  the  seed  of  the  woman  which 
should  bruise  the  serpent's  head  (Gen.  iii.  15).  The  pre- 
diction grows  more  definite  in  the  promise  to  Abraham, 
Isaac,  and  Jacob,  of  the  seed  in  which  all  the  nations  of 
the  earth  should  be  blessed  (Gen.  xii.  3,  xviii.  18,  xxii.  18, 
xxvi.  4,  xxviii.  14).  At  last,  in  clear  and  unmistakable 
language,  the  dying  Israel  foi-etells  the  King  in  whom  the 
royal  line  of  Judali  was  to  culminate  (Gen.  xlix.  10). 
The  heathen  prophet  Balaam,  moved  by  the  divine 
Spirit,  predicts  the  coming  of  the  kingdom  and  its  Sov- 
ereign (Numb.  xxiv.  17  seq.).  Then  the  stream  of  Mes- 
sianic prophecy  begins  to  broaden  and  deepen.  The  ever- 
lasting kingship  is  promised  to  the  house  of  David  (2 
Sam.  Vii.  12-16,  25). 

The  great  Messianic  Psalms  describe  different  phases 
of  the  Messiah's  person  and  work,  his  divine  Sonship, 
his  sufferings,  liis  triumph  over  death,  his  session  at  the 
right  hand  of  God,  his  glory,  his  everlasting  priesthood, 
his  world-wide  dominion  (Psalms  ii.,  xlv.,  Ixxii.,  ex.). 
As  the  kingdom  of  Israel  is  rent  in  twain  and  the  two 
realms  thus  formed  are  torn  by  internal  dissensions  and 
threatened  by  foreign  foes,  and  especially  when  the  Jews 
have  been  carried  into  exile,  the  coming  of  the  Messiah 
occupies  to  a  great  extent  the  prophetic  thought.  He  is 
represented  as  filled  with  the  divine  Spirit.  Divine  at- 
tributes are  ascribed  to  him  :  "  His  name  shall  be  called 
AVonderful,  Counsellor,  The  mighty  God,  The  everlasting 
Father,  The  Pi-ince  of  Peace.     Of  the  increase  of  his  gov- 


JESUS   THE   CHRIST  133 

ernment  and  peace  there  shall  be  no  end,  upon  the  throne 
of  David,  and  upon  his  kingdom,  to  order  it,  and  to  es- 
tablish it  with  judgment  and  with  justice,  from  hence- 
forth even  forever"  (Is.  ix.  6,  7;  cf.  Mic.  v.  2  seq.).  The 
great  unknown  Prophet  of  the  Exile  tells  of  the  suffering 
and  victorious  Servant  of  God,  and  in  language  that  might 
almost  pass  for  prediction  after  the  event,  so  exact  is  it 
even  in  details,  the  sufferings  and  death  of  Christ  with 
the  glory  which  should  follow  (Is.  xl.-lxvi.,  especially 
liii.).  Daniel  in  vision  beholds  the  mysterious  Son  of 
Man  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven,  sees  bestowed  upon 
him  "  an  everlasting  dominion  which  shall  not  pass  away  " 
(Dan.  vii.  13  seq. ;  cf.  ix.  24-27). 

And  so  when  the  Christians  of  apostolic  times,  many  of 
them  fresh  from  Judaism,  and  all  of  them  believing  that 
the  Old  Testament  contained  a  divine  revelation,  con- 
fessed their  faith  in  the  words  Jesus  is  the  Christ, 
they  meant  that  in  him  all  the  predictions  of  the  earlier 
i-evelation  respecting  "  him  that  was  to  come  "  were  ful- 
lilled.  They  saw  in  him  the  perfect  Mediator  between 
God  and  men,  of  whom  the  ancient  prophets,  priests,  and 
kings  were  imperfect  types ;  he  was,  like  the  angel  of  the 
Lord,  the  theophany,  the  manifestation  of  the  divine  pres- 
ence ;  in  his  humanity  abode  the  Shekinah,  the  indwelling 
of  God,  as  in  a  new  and  holier  temple  ;  he  was  Jehovah 
come  to  earth  for  judgment  and  redemption  ;  he  \vas  the 
Messianic  King,  the  Kuler  of  Israel  and  mankind,  the  Sov- 
ereign in  the  long-promised  and  now  established  kingdom 
of  God.  All  this  and  more  they  ascribed  to  him  who  sat 
upon  the  throne,  and  summed  it  all  up  in  that  one  word 
Christ. 

II.  But  let  us  go  back  and  consider  the  teachings  of 
the  Bible  respecting  the  pre-existent  Christ.  Who  was 
this  Being  who  fulfilled  all  prophecy  by  becoming  Jesus 
Christ  ? 

We  shall  not  expect  to  find  the  answ^er  clearly  given 


134  PRESE2<T   DAY   THEOLOGY 

while  the  Saviour  was  still  on  earth.  When  the  disci- 
ples, after  his  ascension,  came  to  understand  his  kingly 
glory,  the  Holy  Spirit  taught  them  the  nature  of  his  pre- 
existent  glory.  Before  that  time  the  psychological  condi- 
tions for  the  understanding  of  the  mystery  were  not 
present.  It  was  one  of  those  subjects  respecting  which 
Jesus  told  his  disciples  just  before  his  death:  "I  have 
many  things  to  say  unto  you,  but  ye  cannot  bear  them 
now.  Howbeit,  w^hen  he,  the  Spirit  of  truth  is  come,  he 
will  guide  you  into  all  the  truth''  (John  xvi.  12,  13). 

Jesus  himself  said  little  of  his  pre-existent  state.  Yet 
he  did  make  a  few  significant  utterances  upon  the  subject, 
which  have  been  preserved  by  that  disciple  whose  eagle 
eye  afterward  saw  deepest  into  the  mystery.  He  speaks 
of  his  being  sent  into  the  world  (John  v.  36,  viii.  42,  x. 
36,  xviii.  37).  He  declares  that  he  came  down  from 
heaven  (John  vi.  38).  In  controversy  with  the  Jews,  who 
denied  his  knowledge  of  Abraham,  on  the  ground  that  he 
was  not  yet  fifty  years  old,  he  gave  utterance  to  the  as- 
tounding assertion,  "  Before  Abraham  was  I  am  ! "  (John 
viii.  56-58).  In  his  prayer  of  high-priestly  intercession  at 
the  close  of  the  Last  Supper  he  referred  in  solemn  lan- 
guage to  the  g\ory  which  he  had  had  with  the  Father  be- 
fore the  world  was  (John  xvii.  5).  All  this  is  little,  but 
it  is  enough,  taken  in  connection  with  his  assertions  of  his 
divinity,  to  show  his  claim  to  have  existed  in  participation 
of  God's  eternit}'. 

The  two  apostles  from  whom  we  derive  our  chief  knowl- 
edge of  the  pre-existent  Christ  are  Paul  and  John.  It  is 
interesting  to  notice  that  they  were  the  two  who  had  the 
fullest  and  truest  conception  of  his  exalted  glory  after  his 
ascension — Paul,  the  apostle,  to  whom  at  his  conversion 
was  vouchsafed  the  vision  of  the  risen  Christ  in  the  daz- 
zling light  of  his  divine  majesty — John,  the  disciple,  who 
leaned  on  the  Saviour's  breast  at  the  Last  Supper,  and  in 
the  marvellous  vision  on  the  isle  of  Patmos,  was  taken  up 


JESUS   THE   CHRIST  135 

into  the  heavenly  glory  and  saw  the  King  in  his  beauty. 
According  to  Paul,  the  Christ  before  his  incarnation  was 
the  Son  of  God,  the  eternal  Son  of  the  eternal  Father,  the 
sharer  of  His  essential  Deity  (Rom.  viii.  3,  32  ;  Gal.  iv. 
4;  Col.  i.  13  seq. ;  Phil.  ii.  6  seq.).  In  that  magnificent 
passage  in  the  first  chapter  of  Colossians,  in  which  the  re- 
lations of  the  Christ  to  the  whole  universe — God,  world, 
angels,  and  men — are  set  forth,  he  is  described  as  "  the  im- 
age of  the  invisible  God,  the  first  born  of  all  creation  " — 
image  as  being  the  revelation  of  God,  first-born  in  the 
sense  of  superiority  to  the  whole  creation  ;  "  for  in  him 
were  all  things  created,  in  the  heavens  and  upon  the 
earth,  things  visible  and  things  invisible,  whether  thrones 
or  dominions  or  principalities  or  powers  ;  all  things  have 
been  created  through  him,  and  unto  him  ;  and  he  is  be- 
fore all  things,  and  in  him  all  things  consist,"  that  is,  hold 
together  or  have  their  continued  existence  (Col.  i.  15-17). 
Could  his  Deity  be  described  in  language  more  impres- 
sive !  It  seems  marvellous  that  anyone  who  accepts  the 
Bible  as  true  can  read  those  fl.owing  words  and  then  de- 
clare the  eternal  Being,  Creator  and  Preserver  of  all 
things,  who  became  incarnate  in  Jesus  the  Christ,  to  be 
less  than  God.  But  there  is  still  another  passage,  equally 
magnificent,  with  a  lyric  power  which  shows  how  nearly 
allied  are  poetry  and  religion,  in  which  Paul  traces  the 
career  of  the  Christ  from  the  primitive  heavenly  glory 
through  the  earthly  humiliation  back  to  the  heavenly 
glory  again  (Phil.  ii.  6-11).  How  does  he  here  describe 
the  pre-existent  Christ  ?  As  "  being  in  the  form  of  God," 
that  is,  as  having  his  essential  and  eternal  existence  in  the 
divine,  or  as  being  possessed  of  a  divine  nature;  while 
equality  with  God  is  represented  as  his  right,  his  personal 
possession,  which  he  temporarily  and  freely  relinquishes 
for  the  purpose  of  carrying  out  his  mission  of  redemptive 
love.  In  this  connection  I  may  mention  the  language  of 
the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  probably  not  written  by  Paul 


136  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

yet  closely  related  to  his  teachings.  Christ  is  described 
before  his  incarnation  as  the  eternal  Son,  the  Creator  of 
all  things,  the  Being  who  upholds  all  things  by  the  word 
of  his  power,  the  effulgence  of  the  divine  glory,  the  very 
image  of  God's  substance,  who  reveals  God  as  the  light 
reveals  the  sun,  or  the  impression  the  seal  that  made  it 
(lleb.  i.  2,  3). 

And  then  we  come  to  John's  teachings.  His  Gospel 
begins  with  the  eternal  pre-existent  state.  He  who  be- 
came incarnate  is  declared  to  be  the  eternal  Logos  or 
Word,  the  principle  of  the  divine  self-revelation.  In  the 
beginning  he  was  with  God,  and  He  was  God  (John  i.  1). 
There  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  John  in  this  solemn 
declaration  which  is  the  caption  of  his  Gospel  means  less 
than  he  says.  The  whole  Gospel  is  only  a  carrying  out  of 
this  main  theme.  If  John  had  not  used  these  words  the 
truth  would  have  been  implied  in  his  declaration  that  the 
exalted  Being  of  whom  he  tells  was  the  Creator  of  all 
things,  the  Source  of  all  light  and  life,  spiritual,  intellec- 
tual, physical,  in  the  universe.  He  was  the  only  begotten 
Son  who  is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father  (John  i.  1-18). 
Such  was  the  Being  who  "  became  flesh  and  dwelt  among 
us." 

The  New  Testament  gives  us  reason  to  believe  that  long 
before  the  incarnation,  indeed  from  the  beo;innino;s  of  hu- 
man  history,  the  Logos  was  the  active  agent  of  revelation 
and  redemption  in  the  world.  He  was  "  the  true  light, 
even  the  light  which  lighteth  every  man  that  cometh  into 
the  world  "  (John  i.  9  ;  for  the  rendering  of  the  verse  see 
Meyer's  "  John,"  and  Dwight  in  Godet's  "John,"  Am.  ed., 
in  loc).  The  deepest  insight  into  Xew  Testament  truth 
tends  to  confirm  the  teaching  of  the  Fathers  respecting 
the  "  Logos  Spermatikos,"  the  divine  Word  in  the  soul 
of  every  man,  who  leads  even  the  heathen  to  the  truth. 
It  was  the  "  Spirit  of  Christ "  that  spoke  through  the 
prophets  of  the  Old  Dispensation  (1  Pet.  i.  11 ;  cf.  iii. 


JESUS  THE   CilKIST  137 

18-20,  according  to  a  widely  accepted  interpretation). 
Paul  says  that  the  "  spiritual  rock "  which  followed  the 
Israelites  in  the  wilderness  was  Christ  (1  Cor.  x.  4,  5). 
We  cannot  doubt,  if  we  accept  the  New  Testament  doc- 
trine in  its  general  principles,  that  the  divine  Logos  was 
present  in  every  revelation  of  God  during  the  Old  Dispen- 
sation. For  this  reason  the  New  Testament  writers,  and 
even  Jesus  himself,  apply  without  hesitation  to  the  Mes- 
siah Old  Testament  language  of  which  the  original  refer- 
ence is  to  Jehovah  (Matt.  xi.  10  ;  Heb.  i.  8-12  compared 
with  Psalm  xlv.  6,  7,  and  cii.  25-27 ;  Eom.  x.  13  with 
Joel  ii.  32  ;  1  Cor.  ii.  16  with  Isaiah  xl.  13 ;  1  Cor.  x.  22 
with  Deut.  xxxii.  21). 

Summing  up  these  Scriptural  data,  we  may  say  that  he 
who  became  incarnate  in  Jesus  the  Christ  was  truly  God, 
distinguished  from  the  Father  as  the  Son,  the  Word,  the 
Image,  the  Effulgence,  of  God,  second  in  the  Godhead  yet 
not  less  than  God.  Whoever  will  call  this  truth  in  ques- 
tion must  seek  his  arguments  outside  of  the  Bible.  The 
pre-existent  Christ  was  God. 

III.  We  are  now  to  examine  the  Scriptural  doctrine  of 
the  Christ  on  earth.  Our  chief  diflBculty  will  arise  from 
the  richness  of  the  material.  Yet  I  shall  hope  to  make 
the  main  points  clear. 

The  first  fact  which  meets  us  is  the  incarnation.  "  The 
Word  became  flesh  "  (John  i.  14).  He  "  who  being  in 
the  form  of  God,  counted  not  equality  with  God  a  prize 
to  be  violently  retained,  emptied  himself,  taking  the  form 
of  a  servant,  being  made  in  the  likeness  of  men  "  (Phil,  ii. 
6-8).  Though  he  was  rich,  yet  for  our  sakes  he  became 
poor,  that  we  through  his  poverty  might  become  rich 
(2  Cor.  viii.  9).  The  object  of  the  incarnation  was  re- 
demption. "  God  so  loved  the  world  that  He  gave  His 
only-begotten  Son,  that  ■svhosoever  believeth  on  him 
should  not  perish  but  have  eternal  life "  (John  iii. 
16,  17). 


138  PRESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

The  'New  Testament  writers,  true  to  the  Old  Testa- 
ment prophecies  of  the  Messiah,  teach  us  that  the  Saviour 
was  a  true  man.  From  his  birth  he  was  subject  to  the 
law  of  human  growth  and  development ;  he  "  advanced  in 
wisdom  and  stature  "  (Luke  ii,  40,  52).  In  outward  ap- 
pearance he  resembled  other  men  (John  iv.  9,  xx.  15). 
lie  manifested  the  ordinary  human  wants,  the  need  of 
sleep,  hunger  and  thirst  (Matt.  viii.  24  ;  John  iv.  6,  xix. 
28).  All  human  sensibilities  stirred  in  his  soul  and  re- 
vealed themselves  in  his  looks  and  acts— joy,  love,  sym- 
pathy, distress,  agitation,  sorrow  even  to  tears,  anger 
(John  xi.  5 ;  Mark  x.  21  ;  Matt.  ix.  36,  xxvi.  38 ;  John 
xiii.  21 ;  Mark  iii.  5).  He  possessed  a  human  soul  and 
spirit.  His  knowledge  and  his  power  were  limited.  He 
could  be  tempted.  Like  other  men  he  prayed  to  God 
(John  xii.  27 ;  Luke  xxiii.  46 ;  Mark  xiii.  32  ;  Matt.  iv. 
1-11;  Heb.  ii.  17,  18;  Mark  i.  35;  John  xvii.  1 ;  Luke  xi. 
1).  He,  in  this  also  like  other  men,  left  this  world  by  the 
gate  of  death. 

At  the  same  time,  while  Jesus  was  true  man,  he  was 
a  unique  man,  in  many  important  I'espects  different  from 
all  other  men.  His  birth  was  a  stupendous  miracle,  for 
he  was  "conceived  by  the  Holy  Ghost"  and  with  no 
human  father  "  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary  "  (Matt.  i.  18-25  ; 
Luke  i.  26  seq.).  All  the  important  junctures  of  his  life 
were  signalized  by  angelic  visitations — his  birth,  his  temp- 
tation, the  agony  in  the  Garden,  the  resurrection,  the  as- 
cension (Luke  i.  26  seq.,  ii.  9  seq.;  Matt.  iv.  xi.;  Luke  xxii. 
43 ;  Matt,  xxviii.  2).  Mention  has  been  made,  in  the  chap- 
ter on  "Inspiration,"  of  the  Saviour's  endowment  with 
the  Holy  Spirit  at  the  baptism — an  inspiration  which  went 
far  beyond  that  of  the  greatest  prophets,  and  which  we 
must  understand  rather  as  giving  egress  to  the  divine 
power  proper  to  his  nature  than  as  enduing  him  with  an 
extraneous  capability.  Thus  inspired,  he  spake  as  never 
man  spake  and  performed  his  miracles.     Kor  shall  we  in 


JESUS   THE   CHRIST  139 

this  connection  fail  to  notice  the  uniqueness  of  Christ's 
death  and  the  marvel  of  his  resurrection. 

The  unique  manhood  of  Jesus  appears  most  strikingly 
in  his  moral  perfection.  He  was  that  "  moral  miracle,"  a 
perfect  man.  We  are  too  apt  to  speak  of  the  Saviour's 
holy  character  and  life  in  negative  terms,  calling  him  the 
sinless  man.  But  in  him  there  was  something  more  than 
sinlessness,  even  supreme  moral  perfection,  an  outflowing 
perfection  which  has  given  mankind  a  new  ideal.  He 
alone  of  all  the  descendants  of  Adam  seems  to  have  been 
from  the  first  without  inherited  taint  or  tendency  to  sin. 
Even  before  his  birth  the  herald  angel  called  him  "  that 
holy  thing  "  (Luke  i.  35).  The  temptations  to  which  he 
was  subjected  after  his  baptism  and  at  later  periods  in  his 
life  were  undoubtedly  real ;  "  he  suffered  being  tempted  " 
(Heb.  ii.  18).  But  Satan  found  nothing  in  him  and  re- 
tired from  the  assault  baffled  and  defeated  (Matt.  iv.  1-18  ; 
John  xiv.  30).  We  have  his  own  assertions,  implied  and 
direct,  that  he  was  sinless  (Matt.  vii.  11 ;  Luke  xi.  13, 
xiii.  3  ;  John  viii.  46,  x.  36).  And  what  is  even  more 
significant,  his  life  and  words,  as  they  are  recorded  by  the 
Evangelists,  bear  out  his  testimony.  We  search  in  vain 
for  a  flaw  in  that  spotless  life.  With  one  voice  and  in 
explicit  language  his  disciples  declare  that  he  knew  no  sin 
(Acts  iii.  14 ;  1  Pet.  i.  19,  ii.  22,  iii.  18 ;  Eom.  viii.  3 ;  2 
Cor.  v.  21 ;  Heb.  iv.  15  ;  1  John  ii.  29,  iii.  7).  And  what 
a  picture  do  they  all  give  us,  drawn  with  reverent  hand 
out  of  their  loving  remembrance  of  his  personality  and 
life,  of  his  love,  his  self-sacrifice,  his  devotion  to  the  truth, 
his  entire  obedience  to  the  divine  will. 

Let  me  mention  still  another  feature  in  his  unique  man- 
hood. He  was  the  central  and  universal  man,  the  typical 
man,  in  whom  all  the  excellencies  of  the  race  are  compre- 
hended and  who  stands  in  a  direct  relation  to  every  man 
in  the  race.  The  title  by  which  he  most  frequently  des- 
ignated himself  was  "  the  Son  of  Man."    It  was  a  Mes- 


140  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

siaiiic  name,  taken  from  the  prophecy  of  Daniel  (vii, 
13  seq.),  where  the  Messiah  is  described  under  this  title  as 
coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven  to  take  possession  of  his 
kingdom.  But  Christ  so  used  it  as  to  show  that  he  in- 
tended by  it  to  express  his  peculiar  relation  to  mankind 
(Matt.  viii.  20,  ix.  6  ;  Mark  ix.  9  ;  Luke  ix.  22  ;  John  v.  27). 
Paul  took  up  the  conception  and  developed  it  in  his  doc- 
trine of  the  Second  Adam,  the  new  spiritual  Head  of  the 
race,  who  has  come  to  redeem  men  from  the  consequences 
of  the  first  Adam's  sin  (Kom.  v.  12  seq.  ;  1  Cor.  xv.  22, 
45  seq.).  The  author  of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  dwells 
upon  the  universal  brotherhood  of  the  Christ,  which  is 
the  ground  of  his  high-priestly  office  (Heb.  ii.  17,  18,  iv. 
14,  15,  V.  7-10). 

Nor  is  this  period  without  its  evidence  of  the  Deity  of 
the  incarnate  One.  Christ  himself  did  not  often  refer  to 
it.  He  would  not  have  been  understood  had  he  done  so. 
But  he  never  denies  it,  always  implies  it,  and  sometimes 
even  asserts  it.  His  life  itself  bore  on  it  the  marks  of 
divinity.  As  when  the  sun  shines  from  behind  heavy 
clouds,  only  now  and  then  glimpses  and  flashes  revealed 
the  presence  of  the  God  in  him,  but  when  they  gleamed 
forth  there  was  no  mistaking  them.  His  sinlessness  in  a 
world  of  sin  receives  its  best  explanation  if  we  suppose 
him  to  have  been  divine  as  well  as  human.  His  whole 
tone  and  bearing  raised  him  above  the  level  of  humanity. 
He  claimed  to  be  greater  than  the  greatest  prophets  of  the 
Old  Dispensation  (Matt.  xii.  41  seq.,  xxii.  41-45).  They 
were  merely  instruments  of  a  higher  power,  receiving 
their  authority  from  above.  He  acted  in  his  own  author- 
ity, at  once  God's  agent  and  His  equal.  Thus  he  set  his 
authority  above  that  of  Moses,  "  It  hath  been  said.  An  eye 
for  an  eye.  .  .  .  But  /say  unto  you.  That  ye  resist 
not  evil!"  (Matt.  v.  38,  39).  Mark  that  "imperial!." 
which  no  mere  man  could  honestly  have  used.  In  like 
manner  his  miracles  were  performed  in  his  own  name. 


JESUS   THE   CHRIST  141 

"  I  will ;  be  thou  clean  ! "  (Matt.  viii.  3).  And  as  lie 
claimed  to  be  greater  than  the  greatest  prophets,  so  he 
claimed  to  be  greater  than  the  temple,  in  whose  holy  of 
holies  dwelt  the  divine  Shekinah  (Matt.  xii.  6).  He 
called  himself  the  Way  of  entrance  to  the  kingdom  of 
God,  the  Door,  the  Good  Shepherd  (John  x.  7,  11,  xiv. 
6).  He  summoned  men  to  personal  faith  in  himself 
(Matt.  xi.  28-30  ;  John  iii.  16).  He  claimed  authority 
to  forgive  sins  (Matt.  ix.  2  ;  Luke  v.  20).  He  offered 
himself  to  the  world  as  the  source  of  spiritual  life  and  the 
supply  of  all  spiritual  needs  (John  v.  26,  vi.  48,  vii.  37). 
He  made  loyalty  to  him  superior  to  the  claims  of  kindred 
and  friendship  (Matt.  viii.  22,  x.  37).  He  declared  that 
he  was  the  Judge  of  mankind,  both  now  and  at  the  Last 
Day,  and  that  the  criterion  of  judgment  was  the  personal 
relation  of  men  to  him  (Matt,  xxv,  34-16 ;  John  v.  22, 
27).  As  the  Lord  of  life,  he  is  to  call  men  forth  from 
their  graves  at  the  resurrection,  as  he  called  back  the 
dead  Lazarus  to  life  (John  vi.  39,  xi.  25). 

In  these  things  the  divinity  of  the  Christ  is  implied. 
But  he  made  more  direct  claims.  The  term  Son,  as 
Christ  uses  it  when  speaking  of  his  Father  in  heaven,  in 
many  instances  undoubtedly  implies  unity  of  essence  with 
God.  In  the  discourses  recorded  in  the  first  three  Gos- 
pels this  is  probable ;  in  those  which  John  has  preserved 
it  is  certain  (Matt.  xi.  27,  xxvi.  29 ;  Mark  xiii.  32  ;  John 
iii.  16,  and  often).  It  is  a  most  significant  fact  that 
Christ,  in  speaking  to  his  disciples  of  God,  never  calls  Him 
"  our  Father ; "  in  one  instance  he  is  at  pains  to  distin- 
guish his  own  relation  to  God  from  that  of  his  disciples 
in  language  which  utterly  precludes  misunderstanding : 
"  I  ascend  unto  my  Father  and  your  Father,  and  to  my 
God  and  your  God  "  (John  xx.  17).  The  apostle  John 
has  preserved  for  us  some  of  the  most  striking  utterances 
of  Christ  respecting  his  divine  nature.  He  identifies  him- 
self with  God  in  such  a  way  in  the  work  of  redemption 


142  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

that  even  his  dependence  becomes  an  evidence  of  a  com- 
mon nature  (John  v.  19,  30).  He  declares  that  to  see 
him  is  tantamount  to  seeing  the  Father  (John  xiv.  9). 
The  same  honor  is  due  to  him  as  to  the  Father  (John  v. 
23).  When  he  says,  "  My  Father  worketh  hitherto,  and 
I  work  "  (John  v.  17),  he  co-ordinates  his  work  with  that 
of  the  Father  in  a  way  no  mere  man  could.  As  we  have 
seen  in  another  connection,  he  declared  his  divine  pre-ex- 
istence,  and  in  such  language  as  to  imply  that  he  was  still 
the  same  divine  personality,  "■  Before  Abraham  was  / 
am  !  "  (John  viii.  58).  Finally,  he  makes  the  explicit  as- 
sertion, "  I  and  my  Father  are  one !  "  (John  x.  30). 
And  in  using  this  passage  I  do  not  deny  that  he  means  to 
say  primarily,  "I  and  my  Father  are  one  in  our  efficiency, 
one  in  our  power ; "  but  my  contention  is  that  this  unity 
of  power  can  only  be  explained  upon  the  ground  of  unity 
of  essence,  and  that  Jesus  so  understood  it  (see  Dwiglit,  in 
Godet's  "  John,"  Am.  ed.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  485).  It  is  true  that 
Christ  said  to  his  disciples  just  before  his  death,  "My 
Father  is  greater  than  I "  (John  xiv.  28),  but  the  appar- 
ent contradiction  disappears  when  we  see  that  he  is  con- 
trasting his  state  of  humiliation,  which  then  had  reached 
its  nadir,  with  the  heavenly  glory  soon  to  be  his  when  all 
the  Father's  power  would  be  in  his  hands.  "If  ye  loved 
me.  ye  would  rejoice,  because  I  said,  I  go  unto  the  Father; 
for  my  Father  is  greater  than  I."  We  may  even  find 
with  Horace  Bushnell  in  these  words  one  of  the  most 
convincing  proofs  of  Christ's  divinity  ;  "How  preposter- 
ous for  any  mere  human  being  of  our  race  to  be  gravely 
telling  the  world  that  God  is  greater  than  he  is  !  "  ("  God 
in  Christ,"  p.  125).  The  Jews  better  understood  what 
Christ  meant  and  took  up  stones  to  stone  him,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  Mosaic  punishment  of  blasphemy  :  "  For  a 
good  work  we  stone  thee  not,"  they  said  ;  "  but  for  blas- 
phemy, and  because  that  thou,  being  a  man,  makest  thy- 
self God  "    (John  x.   33 ;  cf.  v.  IS,  vi.  42,  viii.  52  seq.). 


JESUS   THE   CHRIST  143 

At  the  last  he  was  tried  and  executed  upon  this  very 
charge  of  blasphemy  (Mark  xiv.  61-64 ;  John  xix.  7). 
His  accusers  knew,  and  he  did  not  deny,  that  being  a  man 
he  made  himself  God.  That  was  the  mystery  of  his  in- 
carnation and  his  work.  To  those  who  had  no  spiritual 
understanding  of  his  teachings,  and  would  not  open  their 
liearts  to  his  influence,  no  wonder  this  was  a  stumbling- 
block.  And  yet  here  and  there  was  one  to  whom  a 
glimpse  of  the  truth  came  as  the  explanation  of  every- 
thing. The  heathen  centurion  who  superintended  his 
crucifixion  was  moved  to  exclaim,  "  Truly  this  man  was 
a  Son  of  God  !  "  The  doubting  Thomas,  after  his  resur- 
rection, cried,  unrebuked  by  the  Master,  "  My  Lord  and 
my  God ! " 

I  shall  refer  under  the  next  head  of  our  discussion  to 
what  the  apostles  have  to  testify  respecting  the  deity  of 
Christ.  Their  thoughts  are  chiefly  on  the  risen  Saviour, 
and  they  feel  no  need  of  entering  into  the  question  of  his 
divinity  when  on  earth,  but  they  always  take  it  for 
granted.  They  never  think  of  explaining  his  later  glory 
as  an  apotheosis,  such  as  the  heathen  claimed  for  their 
heroes,  the  assumption  of  a  man  into  the  deitj^^  and  his 
enduement  with  divine  attributes  and  honors.  Incarna- 
tion and  apotheosis  are  two  entirely  different  conceptions, 
and  the  former  was  the  doctrine  of  the  apostles.  "  We 
beheld,"  says  John,  "his  glory,  the  glory  as  of  the  only 
begotten  of  the  Father,"  and,  "  The  life  was  manifested 
and  we  have  seen  it  and  bear  witness  "  (John  i.  14,  ;  1 
John  i.  2). 

It  is  to  be  borne  in  mind  that  this  was  the  time  of  the 
Saviour's  humiliation.  He  had  come  to  earth  to  perform 
that  great  work  by  which  the  kingdom  was  to  be  estab- 
lished as  a  kingdom  of  redemption,  and  he  was  to  be  pre- 
pared for  his  Messianic  kingship.  It  was  not  until  his 
resurrection  that  he  was  "  declared  to  be  Son  of  God  with 
power"   (Rom.  i.  4).     Paul  tells  us  that,  in  taking  upon 


144  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

him  the  "  form  of  a  servant,"  "  he  emptied  himself  "  of 
his  divine  glory  and  of  the  exercise  of  his  divine  at- 
tributes (Phil,  ii,  7).  lie  not  only  subjected  himself 
to  the  necessary  limitations  of  humanity,  but  to  the  lim- 
itations of  one  who  in  a  sinful  world  was  "  made  like 
nnto  his  brethren,"  and  "  w'as  tempted  in  all  points,  like 
as  we  are,  yet  without  sin"  (Heb.  ii.  17,  iv.  15).  In  the 
prosecution  of  his  work  of  salvation  he  passed  through 
the  successive  stages  of  infancy,  childhood,  youth,  and 
manhood,  subjecting  himself  to  the  physical,  intellectual, 
and  spiritual  restrictions  of  each  period.  Even  during 
his  active  ministry,  when  the  glory  of  the  divine  was  only 
partially  concealed  by  the  veil  of  flesh,  his  omnipotence 
and  omniscience  were  both  subordinated  to  the  limitations 
of  his  humanity  and  his  redemptive  work.  As  part  of 
his  mediatorial  vocation,  he  shared  in  human  pain  and 
misery,  and  endured  sorrows  peculiarly  his  own.  "  The 
Captain  of  our  salvation  was  made  perfect  through  suffer- 
ing" (Heb.  ii.  10).  And  then  he  endured  the  cruel  death 
of  the  cross.  How  this  could  be,  how  he  could  be  divine 
and  yet  endure  all  these  human  sufferings  of  his  humilia- 
tion the  sacred  writers  do  not  attempt  to  explain.  They 
give  us  merely  the  facts. 

IV.  We  come  now  to  the  teachings  of  the  I^ew  Testa- 
ment respecting  the  ascended  Christ,  With  the  resurrec- 
tion and  the  ascension  everything  is  changed.  This  is 
the  true  coronation  of  the  Messiah.  The  promised  throne 
of  David  is  the  throne  of  God,  and  now  the  Son  of  David 
for  the  first  time  sits  upon  it.  While  on  earth,  he  was 
the  heir  in  the  far  country  among  the  wicked  husband- 
men, who  plotted  to  kill  him  that  the  vineyard  might  be 
theirs  (Mark  xii.  1-12).  Now  he  had  found  the  way  of 
the  cross  the  way  of  light,  and  had  entered  into  the  pos- 
session of  his  kingly  glory.  While  he  was  still  on  earth 
there  were  a  few  who  believed  that  he  was  the  Messiah, 
but  it  was  only  by  way  of  anticipation.     The  apostles  be- 


JESUS   THE   CHRIST  145 

held  his  glory  upon  the  Mount  of  Transfiguration,  but  it 
was  only  as  a  prophecy  of  that  which  was  to  come  after 
his  resurrection.  His  ascension  was  necessary  not  only 
that  his  disciples  might  understand  that  he  was  the  King, 
but  also  that  the  ground  for  the  understanding  might  be 
supplied.  They  could  not  know  that  he  was  the  Christ 
in  all  the  significance  of  the  Messianic  office,  because  he 
was  not  actually  installed  as  the  Christ.  The  proof  did 
not  come  till  the  day  of  Pentecost.  Then  the  descent  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  and  the  power  given  to  the  disciples  to 
preach  the  Gospel  and  perform  miracles,  gave  the  unde- 
niable evidence  that  Jesus  was  indeed  the  Messiah,  and 
that  he  was  sitting  upon  the  throne.  On  that  day  the 
disciples  were  able  for  the  first  time  to  say,  in  the  words 
of  Peter,  "  Let  all  the  house  of  Israel  know  assuredly, 
that  God  hath  made  that  same  Jesus  whom  ye  have  cruci- 
fied, both  Lord  and  Christ "  (Acts  ii.  36). 

Some  of  the  disciples  had  actual  glimpses  of  the  King. 
The  first  martyr,  confronting  the  unbelieving  Jews,  whom 
he  was  vainly  endeavoring  to  convince  that  Jesus  was  the 
Messiah,  "  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  looked  up  steadfastly 
into  heaven  and  saw  the  glory  of  God,  and  Jesus  standing 
on  the  right  hand  of  God,"  and  died  with  the  cry,  "  Lord 
Jesus,  receive  my  spirit "  (Acts  vii.  55-60).  He  mani- 
fested himself  in  all  his  glory  to  the  persecutor  Paul, 
while  on  his  way  from  Jerusalem  to  Damascus,  and  he 
was  won  to  the  faith  in  Jesus  the  Messiah.  From  this 
time  forward  there  is  no  doubt  in  the  minds  of  the  disci- 
ples as  to  who  and  what  Christ  is.  He  had  declared  just 
before  his  ascension,  "All  power  is  given  unto  me  in 
heaven  and  in  earth  "  (Matt,  xxviii.  18),  and  they  knew 
by  what  they  saw  going  on  about  them,  and  what  they 
experienced  in  their  own  inner  lives,  that  this  was  indeed 
true.  They  called  the  glorified  Jesus  the  Christ,  taking 
the  title  with  which  prophecy  had  made  them  familiar. 
Or  else  they  called  him  Lord,  employing  the  Greek  word 
10 


146  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

Kurios,  the  Septuagint  translation  of  Adonai,  the  term 
used  in  the  reading  of  the  Old  Testament  as  a  substitute 
for  the  sacred  and  unutterable  name  Jehovah.  It  is  in- 
teresting to  note  that  they  applied  it  indiscriminately  to 
God  and  Christ,  with  no  sense  of  inconsistency  in  calling 
the  two  by  the  same  title,  so  that  it  is  often  difficult  to 
tell  whether  the  Father  or  the  Son  is  meant — much  as  to- 
day in  our  common  religious  speech  we  designate  either 
Father  or  Son  as  Lord  (James  v.  8,  10,  11).  According 
to  the  apostolic  conception  Christ  is  at  the  "  right  hand  of 
God,"  that  is,  he  shares  in  the  divine  glory  and  govern- 
ment. He  is  the  Son,  in  a  sense  which  implies  participa- 
tion in  the  divine  essence  (Rom.  viii.  3  ;  Gal.  iv.  4).  Tiie 
apostles  associate  him  with  the  Fathei',  on  equal  terms,  in 
their  benedictions  as  the  author  of  spiritual  blessings,  or 
with  the  Father  and  Holy  Spirit  (Rom.  i.  7,  xvi.  20,  24  ; 

1  Cor.  i.  3,  xvi.  23  ;  2  Cor.  i.  2,  xiii.  14 ;  Gal.  i.  3,  vi.  18  ; 
Eph.  i.  2,  vi.  23,  24).  They  represent  him  as  the  final 
Judge  of  all  (1  Cor.  iv.  5 ;  2  Cor.  v.  10  ;  2  Thess.  i.  6-10 ; 

2  Tim.  iv.  1,  8).  Divine  attributes  are  ascribed  to  him 
(Rev.  i.  18,  xxii.  13).  He  is  an  object  of  worship  to  the 
disciples  (Acts  vii.  59,  60  ;  1  Cor.  i.  2  ;  Phil.  ii.  9,  10  ;  2 
Tim.  iv.  22  ;  Heb.  i.  6;  Rev.  i.  5,  6,  v.  11,  12).  And  theii 
they  call  him  God.  It  is  true  that  the  passages  in  which 
he  is  so  designated  are  all  disputed  by  tliose  whose  doc- 
trinal system  compels  them  to  deny  the  Deity  of  Christ, 
but  the  best  modern  exegesis,  with  a  distinctness  that 
only  grows  more  emphatic  as  IS'^ew  Testament  scholarship 
advances,  defends  the  evangelical  interpretation.  Thus 
Paul  in  the  epistle  to  the  Romans  (ix.  5)  speaks  of  the 
Israelites,  "  whose  are  the  fathers,  and  of  whom  is  Christ 
as  concerning  the  flesh,  who  is  over  all,  God  blessed  for- 
ever ;  "  and  in  the  epistle  to  Titus  (ii.  13)  he  calls  the  Re- 
deemer "  our  great  God  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ "  (see 
Dwight,  in  "  Meyer's  Commentary,"  Am.  ed.,  on  both 
these  passages).     ISTor  is  it  a  matter  of  surprise  that  John, 


JESUS   THE   CUEIST  147 

who  in  the  Prologue  of  his  Gospel  called  the  pre-existent 
Logos  God,  in  his  First  Epistle  says  of  him,  "  This  is  the 
true  God  and  eternal  life  "  (1  John  v.  20). 

The  apostles  lay  the  chief  emphasis,  in  their  references 
to  the  ascended  Christ,  npon  his  divinity.  But  they  do 
not  ignore  his  humanity.  As  he  ascended  into  heaven, 
the  angel  declared,  "  This  same  Jesus  which  is  taken  up 
from  you  into  heaven,  shall  so  come  in  like  manner  as  ye 
have  seen  him  go  into  heaven  "  (Acts  i.  11).  In  his  ex- 
alted glory  he  is  still  the  man  Christ  Jesus,  the  Mediator 
between  God  and  men  (1  Tim.  ii.  5).  He  is  "  the  same  yes- 
terday, to-day,  and  forever  "  (Heb.  xiii.  8).  The  epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  shows  how,  as  the  divinely  human,  he  who 
was  tempted  on  earth  can  still  be  touched  with  the  feeling 
of  our  infirmities  (iv.  15).  John  saw  him  in  the  visions  of 
the  Revelation  still  bearing  the  ti-aces  of  his  earthly  life, 
the  Lamb  that  had  been  slain,  the  One  that  liveth  and  was 
dead  (Eev.  i.  18 ;  v.  6).  There  upon  the  throne  of  the 
divine  majesty  he  sits,  at  once  divine  and  human,  and  in 
him  humanity  is  exalted  to  the  divine  glorj^  Thus  he 
waits  until  redemption  shall  be  complete  and  his  enemies 
vanquished,  then  to  return  to  earth  in  glory.  He  shall 
judge  the  earth,  and  at  the  name  of  Jesus  every  knee 
shall  bow,  of  things  in  heaven  and  things  in  earth  and 
things  under  the  earth,  and  every  tongue  confess  that 
Jesus  Christ  is  Lord,  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father 
(Phil.  ii.  10,  11). 

Y.  Such  are  the  facts  from  which  the  Christian  church 
has  derived  its  doctrine  of  Christ.  Christ  was  the  eternal 
Son  of  God.  To  carry  out  his  redemptive  work  he  be- 
came man,  yet  in  such  a  way  as  to  remain  God,  In  one 
unique  personality  God  and  man  were  united.  He  is  still 
the  God-man,  not  now  in  the  state  of  humiliation,  but  ex- 
alted as  the  King  in  the  divine  kingdom.  These  simple 
Christian  truths  shine  in  their  own  light.  But  the  church 
had  a  long  struggle  to  maintain  them,  and  four  centuries 


148  PEESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

passed  before  it  succeeded  in  so  formulating  its  doctrine  as 
to  be  able  to  defend  it  against  all  assaults.  To  this  doc- 
trine and  the  steps  by  which  it  was  attained  we  must  now 
for  a  little  while  give  our  attention. 

The  apostolic  age  was  not  over  before  heretics  began  to 
pervert  the  scripture  teachings  concerning  Christ,  The 
Docetists  denied  the  true  humanity  of  the  Saviour.  They 
held  that  he  assumed  not  a  real  body  but  only  the  appear- 
ance of  one,  and  thus  they  sought  to  bring  the  doctrine 
into  accordance  with  their  belief  in  the  inherent  evil  of 
matter.  Perhaps  the  apostle  John  has  reference  to  this 
sect  in  his  epistle  when  he  asserts  so  emphatically  the 
coming  of  Jesus  in  the  flesh  (1  John  iv.  2,  3  ;  2  John 
7).  The  Ehionites  went  to  the  other  extreme,  denying 
the  true  divinity  of  Christ.  They  made  him  a  mere  man, 
the  son  of  Joseph  instead  of  the  Son  of  God.  Next  come 
the  Avians,  the  rationalists  of  the  early  church.  They 
could  not  deny  the  pre-existence  of  Christ  yet  were  un- 
able to  admit  his  Deity.  According  to  their  view  he  was 
the  highest  of  all  created  beings,  made  before  time  be- 
gan, and  constituted  God's  agent  in  creation.  lie  was  not 
of  the  same  essence  with  the  father  but  of  a  different 
essence.  This  superhuman  and  superangelic,  yet  not  di- 
vine, being  became  incarnate  in  Jesus.  The  Semi-Ari- 
a7is,  who  sought  to  steer  a  middle  course  between  the 
Arians  and  the  Orthodox  Christians,  maintained  the  view 
of  Origen,  admitting  the  eternity  and  divinitj'  of  the  Lo- 
gos, but  denying  that  he  was  God  in  the  highest  sense  of 
the  term.  According  to  their  doctrine  he  owes  his  exist- 
ence to  the  will  of  the  Father.  He  is  not  of  the  same 
essence  with  the  Father,  but  of  a  similar  essence  (not 
homoousios  but  Jwmoioiisios). 

The  first  of  the  great  ecumenical  Councils  of  the  Chris- 
tian church  was  held  at  Nice,  under  the  auspices  of  the 
Christian  Emperor  Constantino,  in  the  year  325  a.d.  The 
Arian  and  the  Semi-Arian  doctrines  were  both  repudiated 


JESUS   THE   CHRIST  149 

and  the  Deity  of  Christ  asserted  in  the  fullest  and  most 
explicit  terms.  The  creed  adopted  by  that  Council,  and 
reaffirmed  in  the  following  words,  says  of  Christ : 


I  believe  "  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  only-begotten 
Son  of  God,  begotten  of  the  Father  before  all  worlds. 
Light  of  Light,  very  God  of  very  God,  begotten,  not  made, 
being  of  one  substance  with  the  Father ;  by  whom  all 
things  were  made;  who,  for  us  men  and  for  our  salvation, 
came  down  from  heaven,  and  was  incarnate  by  the  Holy 
Ghost  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  was  made  man  ;  he  was 
cruciiied  for  us  under  Pontius  Pilate ;  he  suffered  and  was 
buried  ;  and  the  third  day  he  rose  again,  according  to  the 
Scriptures  ;  and  ascended  into  heaven,  and  sitteth  on  the 
right  hand  of  the  Father ;  from  thence  he  cometh  again, 
with  glory,  to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead ;  whose 
kingdom  shall  have  no  end." 


Thus  both  the  Deity  and  humanity  of  Christ  were  re- 
cognized in  the  doctrine  of  the  church.  But  the  questions 
relating  to  the  personal  union  of  the  two  were  left  unset- 
tled. Hence  a  series  of  new  controversies,  occupying 
more  than  a  century  longer.  The  Aj>olli7ia7'ians  taught 
that  in  the  incarnation  the  Logos  became  the  spirit  of  the 
Christ,  so  that  his  humanity  consisted  only  of  the  body 
and  the  soul  which  man  possesses  in  common  with  the 
animal,  but  lacked  the  reason,  which  is  the  distinctive 
characteristic  of  mankind.  The  Nestorians,  while  admit- 
ting that  Christ  was  truly  divine  and  truly  human,  yet 
separated  the  two  natures  to  such  an  extent  as  practically 
to  sever  the  personal  union  and  leave  a  mere  ethical 
union  between  them.  The  Monojpliy sites  went  to  the 
opposite  extreme,  teaching  that  Christ  after  his  incarna- 
tion had  but  one  nature,  a  nature  at  once  divine  and 
human. 

The  fourth  ecumenical  Council,  held  at  Chalcedon,  a.d. 


150  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

451,  gave  final  shape  to  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  person. 
It  declared  that : 


"  Jesus  Christ  is  perfect  in  his  Godhead,  and  the  same 
is  perfect  in  his  manhood  ;  he  is  truly  God  and  truly 
man,  of  a  rational  soul  and  a  body ;  he  is  consubstantial 
with  the  Father  as  to  his  Deity,  and  the  same  is  consub- 
stantial with  us  as  to  his  humanity,  and  like  us  in  all 
respects,  sin  excepted.  He  was  begotten  of  the  Father 
before  the  ages  as  to  his  Deity ;  but  in  these  last  days  he 
for  us  and  for  our  salvation  was  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary, 
the  mother  of  God,  as  to  his  humanity.  He  is  one  and 
the  same  Christ,  Son,  Lord,  only-begotten,  existing  in  two 
natures  without  mixture,  without  change,  without  division, 
without  separation  ;  the  diversity  of  the  two  natures  not 
being  at  all  destroyed  by  their  union  in  the  one  person, 
but  rather  the  peculiar  property  of  each  nature  being  pre- 
served and  concurring  in  one  person  and  one  subsistence." 

The  same  great  truths  are  expressed  in  the  simple  lan- 
guage of  the  "  Westminster  Catechism  : "  "  The  only  Re- 
deemer of  God's  elect  is  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  being 
the  eternal  Son  of  God  became  man,  and  so  was,  and  con- 
tinueth  to  be,  God  and  man,  in  two  distinct  natures  and 
one  person  forever." 

From  the  days  of  the  great  controversies  which  received 
their  final  settlement  at  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  there 
has  been  substantial  agreement  in  the  Christian  church 
respecting  the  person  of  Christ.  The  few  who  have  dis- 
sented from  the  Orthodox  doctrine  have  been  an  insignifi- 
cant fraction  of  the  body  of  Christians.  The  Unitarian 
movements  of  our  own  time  in  Great  Britain  and  Amer- 
ica, though  they  have  attracted  attention  on  account  of 
the  high  character  of  their  leaders  and  the  philanthropic 
aims  which  they  have  cherished,  have  occasioned  no  ap- 
preciable division  in  the  Christian  church.  The  vast 
majority  of  Christ's  followers  accept  the  Orthodox  doc- 


JESUS   THE   CHRIST  l5l 

trine.     They  accept  it  not  because  it  is  Orthodox,  but  be- 
cause tiiey  believe  it  to  be  biblical  and  true. 

More  than  any  other  doctrine  of  the  Christian  system 
this  expresses  the  unity  of  the  church.  The  scattered 
churches  of  Christendom  are  one  in  their  confession  re- 
specting the  Christ,  The  swarthy  Abyssinians,  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Oriental  communions,  the  Greeks,  the  Koman 
Catholics,  the  many  Protestant  denominations,  agree  in 
the  acceptance  of  this  central  truth  of  the  Christian  faith. 
Great  though  their  differences  are  in  other  respects,  here 
they  are  united.  Jesus  the  Christ  is  their  divine  and  hu- 
man Lord.  Let  us,  therefore,  hold  fast  to  this  precious 
truth  by  holding  fast  to  the  divine  Christ  himself,  who 
ever  lives  and  rules,  our  Saviour  and  our  King. 


IX. 

CHRISTOLOGICAL  PROBLEMS 

It  is  my  purpose  in  the  present  chapter  to  discuss 
several  of  the  more  difficult  problems  connected  with  the 
doctrine  of  Christ's  person,  and  to  give  some  account  of 
the  theories  by  which  the  theologians  have  attempted  to 
solve  them.  The  region  of  speculative  theology  which  we 
shall  thus  enter  may  seem  to  those  who  are  not  familiar 
with  it  barren  and  uninviting.  Certainly  on  its  lofty  up- 
lands the  atmosphere  is  attenuated  and  cold,  and  there  is 
little  to  satisfy  either  the  intellect  or  the  heart.  Never- 
theless, theological  speculation  is  not  without  its  value. 
The  brave  and  honest  attempt  to  solve  an  insoluble  prob- 
lem brings  its  reward.  Although  from  the  nature  of  the 
case  it  must  fail  in  its  main  object,  it  discovers  aspects  of 
truth  which  would  otherwise  be  overlooked.  It  stimulates 
the  mind  to  deep  and  fruitful  thought  upon  the  great 
subjects  wdtli  which  it  deals.  And  best  of  all,  it  teaches 
us  the  boundaries  between  the  known  and  the  unknown, 
the  knowable  and  the  unknowable.  It  is  a  great  thing  in 
theology,  as  indeed  in  all  sciences,  to  know  our  ignorance. 
But  there  are  two  kinds  of  ignorance.  One  is  the  super- 
ficial and  unthinking  kind  which  hinders  all  true  theo- 
logizing. The  other  is  that  docta  ignorantia,  that  learned 
ignorance,  which  is  the  result  of  much  study  and  thought, 
and  which  confesses  its  limitations  because  it  has  learned 
just  where  they  lie  and  just  what  they  are.  It  is  the  latter 
which  we  need  in  theology.  In  a  science  so  high,  where 
the  Infinite  and  His  relations  to  the  finite  are  the  objects 


CHEISTOLOGICAL   PEOBLEMS  153 

of  investigation,  every  fact  is  but  an  island  of  knowledge 
encompassed  by  a  sea  of  mystery.  It  is  the  man  who  has 
followed  speculative  theology  in  all  its  lofty  flights  and 
has  thus  learned  both  its  strength  and  its  weakness,  who 
comes  back  with  the  spirit  of  a  little  child  to  the  confes- 
sion of  Paul,  "  We  know  in  part."  "  As  for  perfection  or 
completeness  in  divinity,"  says  Lord  Bacon,  with  a  wisdom 
far  in  advance  of  his  age,  "  it  is  not  to  be  sought.  For  he 
that  will  reduce  a  knowledge  into  an  art,  will  make  it 
round  and  uniform  ;  but  in  divinity  many  things  must  be 
left  abrupt  and  concluded  with  this  :  O  altitudo  dimtiarutn 
sapienticB  et  scientim  Dei  !  qiiami  incomyTehensihilia  sunt 
judicia  ejus,  et  investigabiles  vice  ejus  !  "  (O  the  depths 
of  the  riches  both  of  the  wisdom  and  knowledge  of  God ! 
how  unsearchable  are  his  judgments,  and  his  ways  past 
finding  out !     Rom.  xi.  33). 

I.  The  first  of  the  problems  before  ns  concerns  the 
Reason  for  the  incarnation.  Would  the  Word  have  be- 
come flesh  had  it  not  been  for  sin  and  the  consequent 
need  of  redemption  ?  The  traditional  answer  to  this  ques- 
tion is  in  the  negative.  The  great  majority  of  thinkers 
in  the  Christian  church  have  agreed  with  Anselm,  who  in 
his  "  Cur  Deus  Homo  ? " — Wliy  did  God  become  Man  ? — 
made  the  redemptive  work  the  ground  of  the  incarnation. 
Had  Adam  stood  his  probation  successfully,  it  is  said,  God 
would  liave  brought  the  race  forward  to  its  goal  by  an- 
other and  shorter  way.  It  was  to  correct  the  havoc 
which  sin  has  made  in  God's  fair  creation  that  the  eternal 
Son  of  God  became  man. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  held  that  the  incarnation  would 
have  taken  place  had  there  been  no  sin.  There  are  traces 
of  this  view  in  the  writings  of  the  great  church  father 
Irenaeus.  It  was  maintained  by  Rupert  of  Deutz  in  the 
Middle  Ages.  It  has  been  revived  and  presented  with 
great  force  and  plausibility  by  some  of  the  most  distin- 
guished speculative  theologians  of  recent  times  in  Ger- 


154  PEESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

many,  notably  by  Martensen  and  Dorner.  They  teach 
that  since  the  race  was  created  for  the  God-man,  it  needs 
him  for  its  perfection  as  well  as  for  its  redemption.  He 
is  the  Head  of  mankind ;  without  him  the  race  would  be 
incomplete.  Had  Adam  remained  holy,  Christ  must  still 
have  needs  come,  to  sum  up  all  things  in  himself,  the 
things  in  heaven  and  the  things  upon  the  earth  (Eph.  i. 
10).  This  view  is  commonly  held  in  connection  with  a 
larger  scheme  of  doctrine.  God's  relation  to  the  world 
has  been  from  the  first  one  of  self-communication  and 
self-revelation  or  self-expression.  Creation  is  the  begin- 
ning of  the  process  of  which  the  incarnation  marks  the 
culmination,  and  the  final  establishment  of  the  kingdom 
the  completion.  God  communicates  His  perfections  first 
to  the  material  world  and  makes  it  a  true  though  imper- 
fect expression  of  His  nature.  Then  in  man,  created  in 
His  own  image,  he  finds  a  truer  and  higher  medium  and 
object.  The  individual  and  the  race  each  body  forth  in 
their  own  way  the  perfections  of  the  divine,  and  God 
finds  in  them  a  temple  for  His  indwelling.  But  still  the 
self-communication  and  self-revelation  are  imperfect  and 
relative.  Only  broken  and  scattered  rays  of  the  divine 
light  are  manifested.  The  indwelling  of  God  is,  so  to 
speak,  external  and  partial.  But  in  the  incarnate  Son, 
Jesus  the  Christ,  God  finds  the  perfect  embodiment  of 
His  perfections,  the  true  and  adequate  image  of  the  divine. 
In  him  the  self-communication  and  self-revelation  are  not 
relatively  but  absolutely  realized.  There  is  no  separation 
and  scattering  of  the  rays  from  the  divine  light,  but  they 
are  concentrated  as  in  a  focus,  so  that  he  is  the  "  Light  of 
the  world."  God  dwells  in  him,  not  externally,  not  as  a 
different  Being  coming  from  without,  but  through  the 
Logos  as  the  perfect  indwelling  of  the  Deity,  in  the  holy 
of  holies  of  the  perfect  temple.  He  possesses  the  Spirit 
without  measure.  Christ  now  becomes  the  Perfecter  of 
the  race.     He  gathers  a  holy  manhood  about  him,  to 


CHRISTOLOGICAL   PROBLEMS  155 

whom  lie  imparts  his  Spirit,  bringing  them  into  like- 
ness with  himself  and  uniting  them  with  God.  ISTo  man 
attains  the  end  of  his  creation  except  through  Christ. 
Apart  from  him  he  remains  in  his  spiritual  nonage.  And 
equally  the  race  needs  him  for  its  completion.  Through 
the  Christ  the  indwelling  of  God  in  mankind  is  consum- 
mated, and  the  church,  which  is  the  body  of  Christ,  is 
His  everlasting  temple.  Of  course,  if  this  scheme  of  doc- 
trine be  true,  it  follows  that  the  incarnation  is  essential  to 
the  evolution  of  humanity  apart  from  the  fact  of  sin. 

Now  the  beauty  of  this  speculation  is  not  to  be  denied, 
nor  the  new  aspects  of  truth  which  it  brings  to  light. 
Nevertheless,  there  is  little  in  the  Scriptures  to  sustain  it. 
The  redemptive  revelation,  through  which  alone  we  have 
any  knowledge  of  the  incarnation  and  the  God-man,  bases 
itself  entirely  upon  the  fact  of  sin.  And  the  existence  of 
sin  and  the  need  of  redemption  are  the  only  reasons  given 
for  the  coming  of  Christ.  It  was  redemptive  love  that 
led  the  Father  to  send  His  only-begotten  Son,  "  that  who- 
soever belie veth  on  him  should  not  perish  but  have  eter- 
nal life"  (John  iii.  16).  Christ  says  himself  that  he  came 
to  save  the  world  (John  xii.  47).  His  mission  was  to  seek 
and  save  that  which  was  lost  (Luke  xix.  10).  "  God  was 
in  Christ  reconciling  the  world  unto  himself,  not  reckon- 
ing unto  them  their  trespasses  "  (2  Cor.  v.  19).  The  very 
passage  upon  which  those  who  teach  an  incarnation  apart 
from  sin  principally  rely,  seems  to  make  redemption 
through  Christ's  blood  an  essential  part  of  his  coming 
(Eph.  i.  7).  So  far  the  presumption  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment seems  to  favor  the  traditional  view.  The  other 
theory  may  be  true,  but  certainly  it  does  not  seem  to  be 
scriptural. 

And  yet,  have  we  reached  the  bottom  of  the  matter  ? 
Are  not  both  views,  so  far  as  they  attempt  to  answer  the 
question  what  would  have  been,  had  there  been  no  sin, 
speculations  ?     What  right  does  the  Bible  give  us  to  sup- 


156  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

pose  that  God  ever  meant  that  this  world  should  be  with- 
out sin  ?  Do  not  misunderstand  me.  I  am  not  teachino- 
the  so-called  supralapsarian  doctrine  that  God  efficiently 
caused  sin,  that  so  lie  might  manifest  His  glory  in  the 
salvation  of  the  elect  and  the  perdition  of  the  non-elect. 
Undoubtedly  Adam  and  his  successors  have  freely  sinned. 
But  did  not  God  from  the  first  know  all  this  ?  Did  He 
not  determine  in  His  eternal  plan  to  permit  the  sin  which 
would  be  freely  connnitted  ?  And  did  He  not  construct 
the  world  and  create  man  upon  the  assumption  of  sin  ? 
Was  not  redemption,  which  implies  sin,  a  part  of  the  oi-igi- 
nal  decree  ?  Was  it  not  woven  into  the  very  fabric  of  this 
earth  and  its  human  race?  Sin  was  no  surprise  to  God, 
which  redemption  came  in  afterward  to  correct.  Christ 
was  from  the  first  intended  to  be  the  sinner's  Saviour,  and 
tlie  redeemed  were  "  chosen  in  him  before  the  founda- 
tion of  the  world  "  (Eph.  i.  4),  To  understand  what  God 
would  have  done,  had  there  been  no  sin,  we  should  have 
to  go  back  into  the  counsels  of  eternity  and  know  all  the 
infinite  possibilities  of  God.  Sin  does  exist,  and  Christ 
has  come  that  he  might  redeem  us  from  it,  and  he  is  to 
the  sinful  world,  and  every  soul  in  it  who  accepts  his 
grace,  both  Redeemer  and  Perfecter.  But  beyond  this 
we  cannot  go.  We  pass  out  of  the  realm  of  knowledge 
into  that  of  mystery. 

n.  Another  problem  relates  to  the  possibility  of  the 
incarnation.  In  the  person  .of  Christ  the  infinite  and  the 
finite  are  united.  The  mighty  God  has  become  man.  We 
ask,  like  Kicodemus,  when  Jesus  told  him  of  the  new 
birth,  "  How  can  these  things  be  ?  "  Is  not  this  concep- 
tion of  the  God-man  self-contradictory  ?  Are  not  Deity 
and  humanity  incommensurate  forms  of  existence  ?  Are 
we  not  dealing  with  words  rather  than  with  facts,  when 
we  talk  of  a  union  of  the  divine  and  the  human  in  a 
single  personality  ? 

Theology  has  not   left   these   [questions   wholly  unan- 


CIIKISTOLOGICAL   PROBLEMS  157 

swered.  It  has  done  its  best  to  solve  the  problem  before 
us.  It  shows,  in  the  first  place,  that  the  theistic  concep- 
tion of  God — which  is  the  Christian  conception — lays 
the  basis  for  the  doctrine  of  the  incarnation  in  its  view  of 
the  relation  of  God  to  His  creatures.  The  deistical  notion 
of  God,  which  separates  Plim  from  tlie  completed  crea- 
tion, confining  His  agency  to  sitting  apart,  as  Carljle 
says,  and  guiding  it,  and  seeing  it  go,  leaves  no  place  for 
an  incarnation.  But  Christianity  accepts  no  such  meagre 
doctrine  of  God's  providence.  Rather  it  regards  God  as 
immanent  in  all  the  activities  of  the  material  world  and 
of  man.  His  presence  and  power  are  everywhere.  Sec- 
ond causes  are  pei-raeated  with  the  First  Cause.  Instead 
of  the  finite  being  separated  from  the  Infinite,  it  is  every- 
where full  of  the  Infinite.  The  finite  is  the  appointed 
means  for  the  revelation  of  the  Infinite.  There  is  a  true 
sense  in  which  God  has  His  abode  in  every  atom,  and 
manifests  His  power  in  every  transformation  of  energy. 
Christian  theism  finds  an  element  of  truth  in  pantheism 
as  well  as  in  deism.  It  avoids  the  errors  of  both.  It 
holds  to  both  the  immanence  and  the  transcendence  of 
God.  But  its  doctrine  of  the  divine  immanence  removes 
some  of  the  most  forcible  objections  to  the  incarnation.  If 
the  Infinite  dwells  in  every  grass-blade,  there  is  no  self- 
contradiction  in  the  idea  of  His  indwelling  in  the  Christ. 

Again,  man  was  made  in  an  especial  sense  for  the  di- 
vine indwelling.  He  was  created  in  the  divine  image. 
He  attains  his  true  ideal  only  when  his  soul  becomes  the 
temple  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  However  much  of  mystery 
there  may  be  about  it,  every  Christian  realizes  in  his  own 
experience  this  inward  presence  and  abiding  of  God.  If 
the  mighty  God  can  enter  the  soul  of  ordinary  men  and 
make  his  abode  there,  if  this  was  the  purpose  for  which 
men  M^ere  created,  then  is  it  altogether  strange  that  He 
should  find  in  a  higher  and  fuller  sense  His  abode  in  the 
perfect  humanity  of  the  Christ  ? 


158  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

So  much  for  the  hints  in  explanation  of  the  incarnation 
wliich  are  suggested  by  the  nature  of  the  creature.  There 
are  others  which  come  to  us  when  we  consider  the  charac- 
ter of  God.  The  Christian  revelation  has  given  us  a 
conception  of  God  that  is  wholly  new.  There  are  indeed 
faint  intimations  in  nature  and  the  ethnic  religions  that 
God  is  love.  But  only  Christianity  makes  known  the  full 
meaning  of  the  truth.  The  essence  of  love  is  self- 
bestowal,  the  giving  of  self  for  the  good  of  others.  It 
finds  its  highest  exercise  in  the  sacrifice  of  self.  It  is 
greatest  when  it  stoops  the  lowest.  This  is  the  side  of 
God's  character  which  redemption  reveals  to  us.  His 
glory  is  in  His  condescension.  He  does  not  demean  Him- 
self when  He  takes  upon  Him  the  sins  and  sorrows  of 
men  ;  rather  He  manifests  His  greatness.  "  Thus  saith 
the  high  and  lofty  One  that  inhabiteth  eternity,  whose 
name  is  Holy  :  I  dwell  in  the  high  and  holy  place,  with 
him  also  that  is  of  a  contrite  and  humble  spirit "  (Isaiah 
Ivii.  15).  Now  it  is  in  accordance  with  the  character 
of  God,  as  thus  revealed,  that  He  should  condescend  to 
take  up  His  permanent  abode  in  humanity  through  the 
incarnation,  and  especially  that  He  should  do  it  for  the 
sake  of  redeeming  a  lost  race.  God  could  not  have  done 
a  thing  more  Godlike  than  this. 

But  while  these  considerations  go  far  to  meet  the  diffi- 
culties which  arise  respecting  the  possibility  of  the  incar- 
nation, I  am  far  from  asserting  that  they  explain  the 
transcendent  fact  itself.  It  is  and  must  ever  remain  a 
mystery.  It  is  unlike  every  other  fact  in  the  whole  range 
of  existence.  The  more  deeply  we  ponder  it,  the  greater 
become  the  length  and  breadth  and  depth  and  height  of 
its  incomprehensibility. 

III.  Still  another  problem  is  that  of  the  Kenosis  or 
self-emptying  of  the  divine  Word.  Paul  tells  us  that  the 
eternal  Son,  who  was  in  the  form  of  God  and  thought 
it  not  robbery  to  be  equal  with  God,  "  emptied  himself, 


CHRISTOLOGICAL   PROBLEMS  159 

taking  the  form  of  a  servant,  being  made  in  the  likeness 
of  men  "  (Phil.  ii.  6,  7).  John  tells  us  that  "  the  Word 
hecame  flesh  "  (John  i.  14).  Now  how  much  do  these  ex- 
pressions mean  ?  "We  know  that  Jesus  Christ  was  born 
an  infant,  increased  in  wisdom  and  stature,  passed  through 
childhood  and  youth  to  manhood,  lived  for  thirty  years  the 
life  of  an  ordinary  man,  in  pursuance  of  his  redemptive 
ministry  went  about  for  three  years  or  more  doing  good, 
suffered,  died,  rose  from  the  dead — all  before  he  ascended 
to  his  heavenl}^  gloi'J  and  sat  down  upon  the  throne  of 
God.  We  know  that  during  all  this  time  he  was  sub- 
ject to  human  limitations,  hungered,  thirsted,  slept,  expe- 
rienced human  weakness  in  body  and  mind.  We  know 
that  in  some  things  he  was  ignorant  (Mark  xiii.  32),  and 
that,  while  the  divine  power  was  at  his  disposal,  he  exer- 
cised it  only  in  the  performance  of  his  miracles,  which 
were  few  when  we  consider  the  extent  of  his  activity. 
Ai'e  we,  then,  to  understand  that  when  the  Logos  became 
flesh  he  emptied  himself  of  the  divine  attributes  ?  Did 
the  divine*  nature  conform  itself  to  the  limits  of  the  human 
nature  ?  Or  did  the  divine  nature  remain,  in  all  its  integ- 
rity, in  full  possession  of  the  divine  attributes  ?  Was 
Christ,  as  to  his  Deity,  omniscient,  omnipotent,  and  omni- 
present, while  in  his  humanity  he  was  ignorant,  weak,  and 
confined  to  a  single  place  ? 

The  traditional  theology  accepts  the  latter  alternative. 
It  believes  it  necessary  if  we  are  to  maintain  both  natures 
in  their  integrity.  While  the  babe  Jesus  lay  slumbering 
in  the  manger  at  Bethlehem,  the  eternal  Son  was  in  the 
full  exercise  of  his  divine  attributes,  manifesting  the  di- 
vine glory  in  Heaven,  upholding  the  whole  creation  by 
the  word  of  his  power,  governing  all  things  by  his  prov- 
idence, present  in  the  utmost  corner  of  the  universe. 
When  the  human  Jesus  was  suffering  his  agony  in  the 
Garden  and  dying  on  the  cross,  his  divine  nature  was  in 
the  full  enjoyment  of  the  heavenly  blessedness.     Only 


160  PKESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

tlii'oiigli  his  connection  with  the  liunianity  of  Christ  could 
the  divine  Son  be  said  to  have  been  tempted.  Merely 
the  human  in  Christ  sorrowed  and  suffered,  for  God  is 
ever  supremely  happy  and  incapable  of  suffering.  The 
advocates  of  this  theory  have  always  asserted  that  the 
God-man  was  but  one  person.  Yet  they  have  generally 
held  that  there  were  two  consciousnesses  in  him,  the  one 
divine  and  the  other  human. 

On  the  other  hand,  many  modern  theologians  have  at- 
tempted to  explain  the  mystery  by  a  very  different  line  of 
speculation.  They  are  especially  concerned  to  maintain 
the  unity  of  Christ's  person,  even  at  the  expense  of  the 
integrity  of  his  two  natures.  Prominent  among  these 
theologians  are  Gess,  Thomasius,  and  Godet.  They  find 
their  starting-point  in  the  Lutheran  Christology.  Luther, 
in  order  to  maintain  his  doctrine  of  the  actual  presence 
of  Christ's  body  in  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper, 
taught  that  in  the  glorified  Christ  the  attributes  of  the 
divine  nature  are  connnunicated  to  the  humanity,  so  that 
the  latter  is  omnipresent,  omniscient,  and  omnipotent. 
The  theologians  of  whom  I  am  speaking  apply  the  same 
theory  to  Christ  in  the  state  of  humiliation,  only  trans- 
posing the  relation.  They  hold  that  while  Christ  was  on 
earth  the  attributes  of  the  human  nature  were  communi- 
cated to  his  Deity.  We  have  seen  that  Paul  calls  the 
act  by  which  the  Logos  became  incarnate,  an  emptying  of 
himself,  a  Kenosis,  if  we  emplo}'  the  Greek  word  (Phil. 
ii.  7).  What  was  this  Kenosis  ?  was  it  a  mere  renuncia- 
tion of  the  divine  glory,  or  was  it  something  more  ?  The 
answer  of  these  theologians — who  are  called,  by  way  of 
eminence,  Kenotists,  and  whose  theory  is  similarly  desig- 
nated the  Kenosis  theory — is  that  the  Logos  emptied  him- 
self of  the  divine  attributes,  some  say  of  all  the  divine 
attributes,  others,  only  of  those  which  belong  to  God's  re- 
lation to  the  world.  By  a  process  of  self-limitation  the 
divine  Son  reduced  himself,  as  it  were,  to  the  dimensions 


CHRISTOLOGICAL   PROBLEMS  161 

of  humanity.  He  relinquished  his  omnipresence,  omnis- 
cience, and  omnipotence.  He  divested  himself  of  his 
eternal  self- consciousness.  In  a  word,  he  retained  only 
the  bare  divine  essence. 

The  theory  iinds  a  typical  form  in  the  Kenosis  doctrine 
of  Gess.  He  holds  that,  in  the  incarnation,  the  Son  not 
only  assumed  a  human  nature,  but  actually  hecame  a  hu- 
man soul  in  a  human  body.  The  act  and  process  of  self- 
limitation  by  which  the  incarnation  was  effected  may  be 
illustrated  by  the  phenomena  of  sleep  in  ordinary  human 
experience.  What  is  it  to  go  to  sleep  ?  It  is  to  relinquish 
for  a  time  the  attributes  of  our  spiritual  being,  to  renounce 
our  self -consciousness,  and  to  pass  into  a  state  of  uncon- 
sciousness. The  soul  is  present  in  sleep,  but  it  is  present 
as  bare  essence ;  its  attributes  are  quiescent.  Gess  calls 
attention  to  the  fact  that  we  generally  enter  into  the  state 
of  sleep  by  an  act  of  free  choice  and  volition  ;  we  will  to 
sleep,  that  is,  we  will  to  reduce  our  souls  to  a  state  of  un- 
consciousness and  passivity.  Not  dissimilar  was  the  ex- 
perience of  the  Son  when  he  became  man.  By  an  act  of 
free  self-determination  he  divested  himself  of  his  divine 
self-consciousness  and  his  divine  attributes  and  became 
the  infant  Jesus.  There  was  but  one  self-consciousness 
in  the  babe  on  Mary's  knee,  namely,  that  which  belonged 
to  it  as  a  human  being  just  entering  upon  life,  and  en- 
swathed  in  this  self-consciousness,  lying  dormant  there, 
reduced  to  these  human  and  infantile  dimensions,  was  the 
eternal  self -consciousness  of  the  divine  Son,  which  he  had 
thus  freely  relinquished  for  the  purposes  of  redemption. 
As  the  child  increases  in  wisdom  and  stature  the  divine 
nature  is  proportionately  rehabilitated.  With  the  growth 
of  the  human  self-consciousness  the  divine  self -conscious- 
ness reappears.  The  boy  Jesus  in  the  Temple  already 
calls  God  his  Father  in  a  higher  sense  than  other  men,  and 
is  stirred  with  presentiments  of  his  great  work.  The  bap- 
tism brings  him  into  the  full  consciousness  of  who  and 
11 


162  PEESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

what  he  is,  and  of  his  redemptive  mission.  The  complete 
rehabilitation  of  the  divine  attributes  and  functions  comes 
with  the  ascension  to  God's  right  hand,  which  ends  the 
period  of  humiliation  and  begins  the  state  of  exaltation 
and  glory.  Now  he  is  God  not  only  in  essence  but  in  the 
possession  and  exercise  of  all  the  divine  qualities. 

Another  speculation,  designed  to  occupy  middle  ground 
between  the  traditional  view  and  the  Kenosis  theories,  is 
that  of  the  great  German  theologian  Dorner.  It  is  com- 
monly called  the  theory  of  Progressive  Incarnation,  a 
designation  which,  however,  is  not  wholly  satisfactory. 
Dorner  holds  with  the  advocates  of  the  traditional  doc- 
trine that  during  the  whole  of  Christ's  earthly  life  the 
Logos  remained  in  the  full  possession  of  the  divine  attri- 
butes and  self-consciousness.  He  differs  from  them,  how- 
ever, in  his  view  of  the  tlieanthropic  or  divinely  human 
person  of  Christ.  The  common  view  has  been  that  the 
person  of  the  Logos  became  the  person  of  the  God-man,  so 
that  the  humanity,  apart  from  its  union  with  the  divine 
nature,  is  impersonal.  Dorner  maintains  that  the  the- 
anthropic  person  is  the  result  of  the  union  of  the  two  nat- 
ures. The  "  I  "  of  the  Christ  is  not  the  "  I "  of  the  eternal 
Logos,  but  a  new  "  I,"  a  new  center  of  self-consciousness 
and  self-determination,  which  has  been  constituted  through 
the  uniting  of  the  divine  with  the  human.  Accordingly, 
the  humanity  of  Christ  is  no  more  impersonal  than  the 
divinity  ;  the  two  find  their  common  meeting-point  in  the 
one  personality  of  the  God-man.  Now  at  the  incarnation 
the  Logos  united  himself  truly  to  the  human  nature,  so  that 
it  could  be  said  that  "  the  Logos  was  from  the  beginning 
united  with  Jesus  in  the  deepest  ground  of  his  being,  and 
the  life  of  Jesus  was  always  a  tlieanthropic  life  "  (Dorner, 
"  Glaubenslehre,"  §  104,  vol.  ii.,  p.  431).  This  union,  how- 
ever, was  at  first  relatively  exteinal  and  incomplete.  The 
newly  established  personality  partook  of  the  human  limita- 
tions of  the  child  Jesus.     But  as  in  the  process  of  growth 


CHRISTOLOGTCAL   PROBLEMS  163 

the  theantliropic  personality  was  developed,  the  Logos 
commnnicated  himself  more  and  more  fully  to  the  hu- 
man natm-e  of  Christ  and  the  union  between  them  became 
more  and  more  complete.  This  gradual  welding  of  the 
two  natures  into  closer  union  may  be  illustrated  by  the  re- 
lations of  the  soul  and  body  in  the  ordinary  human  being. 
In  infancy  soul  and  body  are  truly  united,  but  not  com- 
pletely united.  The  whole  process  of  growth  and  educa- 
tion is  a  progressive  blending  of  sonl  and  body.  The 
body  is  brought  under  the  mastery  of  the  soul,  so  that  it 
becomes  its  perfect  instrument  in  all  its  activities.  The 
soul  comes  to  interpenetrate  the  whole  body.  It  is  not  in 
a  mere  figure  of  speech  that  we  say  of  the  musician  that 
his  soul  was  in  his  fingers.  In  Lowell's  poem,  when  the 
student  goes  into  his  library  and  takes  the  volumes  from 
the  shelves,  the  way  in  which  he  touches  the  leaves  tells 
the  story  of  his  soul's  love  for  them  : 

"  '  We  know  the  practised  finger,' 

Said  the  books,  '  that  seems  like  brain.' " 

The  analogy  helps  us  to  understand  the  way  in  which 
the  union  between  the  Logos  and  the  human  Jesus  was 
consummated.  At  first  it  was  real  but  incomplete ;  but 
as  time  went  on,  and  Jesus  increased  in  wisdom  and 
stature,  and  in  favor  with  God  and  man,  the  Logos  be- 
stowed himself  more  and  more  fully,  and  the  two  nat- 
ures became  more  and  more  intimately  connected.  At 
first  the  union  was  what  might  be  called  a  natural  or 
physical  one.  As  the  process  of  growth  proceeded  it  be- 
came more  and  more  an  ethical  or  moral  union.  There 
was  on  the  human  side  a  sinless  development  of  character, 
an  opening  to  receive  the  divine.  There  was  on  the  di- 
vine side  an  impartation  of  the  divine  perfections  and  a 
closer  and  more  intimate  indwelling.  This  moral  union 
was  consummated  in  the  death  of  Christ,  when  the  divine 


164  PKESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

and  the  liuman  became  perfectly  united  in  the  accomplish- 
ment of  redemption.  It  was  manifested  in  its  perfection 
at  the  resurrection  and  ascension,  when  the  Christ  en- 
tered upon  the  exercise  of  his  divine  prerogatives. 

What  shall  we  say  of  these  various  theories  ?  It  is  not 
very  difficult  to  criticise  them.  In  each  there  are  ele- 
ments of  truth,  which  we  gladly  recognize,  as  well  as  de- 
fects which  render  their  full  acceptance  impossible.  The 
traditional  theory  rightly  emphasizes  the  integrity  of  the 
two  natures  after  the  personal  union  has  been  constituted. 
It  will  not  allow  the  Deity  of  Christ  to  be  in  the  slightest 
degree  infringed  upon.  It  is  true  to  the  Gospel  teachings 
when  it  finds  the  original  centre  of  personal  life  rather 
in  the  divinity  than  in  the  humanity.  The  Christ  who 
could  say,  "  Before  Abraham  was,  I  am,"  and  speak  of  the 
glory  "  which  I  had  with  the  Father  before  the  world 
was,"  certainly  regarded  the  "  I "  which  spoke  as  identical 
with  the  "I"  of  which  pre-existence  was  predicated. 
God  was  in  Christ  in  a  truly  personal  sense  reconciling 
the  world  unto  Himself.  And  yet  it  cannot  be  denied 
that  this  view,  by  so  sharply  distinguishing  the  divine 
from  the  human,  raises  very  grave  difiiculties.  The  idea 
of  a  double  consciousness  seems  to  sever  the  personal 
unity.  The  human  experience  of  the  Saviour,  his  phys- 
ical, mental,  and  spiritual  development,  his  temptation, 
sufferings,  and  death,  loses  its  significance  if  it  is  to  be 
predicated  of  his  human  nature  alone  while  his  divinity 
had  no  direct  participation  in  it.  It  is  difficult  to  see 
in  what  true  sense  the  Logos  emptied  himself  in  the  in- 
carnation. There  is  a  duality  in  the  doctrine  which  we 
strive  in  vain  to  remove.  The  Kenosis  theory  relieves  the 
difficulties  just  mentioned.  It  emphasizes  the  reality  of 
the  incarnation  as  an  actual  entering  of  the  Logos  into 
union  with  humanity.  When  the  self-limitation  has  been 
effected,  all  duality  disappears.  There  is  but  one  con- 
sciousness, one  process  of  development.     The  earthly  ex- 


CHRISTOLOGICAL   PROBLEMS  165 

perience  of  Christ  belongs  to  the  entire  God-man  and  not 
merely  to  his  human  nature.  The  divinity,  as  well  as  the 
humanity,  is  all  there  in  that  one  being,  Jeans  Christ.  So 
long  as  we  are  dealing  with  the  facts  of  the  Gospel  his- 
tory this  theory  carries  smoothly  onward.  But  there  is 
another  side  to  it.  What  is  this  self-emptied  Logos,  di- 
vested of  the  divine  attributes,  only  partially  possessed  of 
the  divine  consciousness  ?  Is  he  divine  ?  We  say  that 
the  divine  essence  remains,  though  stripped  of  its  attri- 
butes. But  what  is  essence  without  attributes  ?  It  is 
possible  for  a  being  to  relinquish  the  exercise  of  its  attri- 
butes and  remain  itself,  but  when  the  attributes  them- 
selves are  relinquished,  what  is  left  ?  Modern  philosophy 
does  not  allow  the  old  idea  of  qualities  separable  from 
substance ;  it  teaches  rather  that  a  substance  consists  in 
its  qualities.  Take  away  from  the  stone  that  lies  at  your 
feet  its  extension,  color,  impenetrability,  and  other  prop- 
erties, and  you  have  nothing  left  but  that  metaphysical 
ghost  which  philosophers  have  called  the  "thing  in  it- 
self," which  has  no  existence  except  in  the  mind.  The 
Kenosis  theory  removes  one  set  of  difficulties  by  raising 
another  far  more  serious.  It  explains  Christ's  earthly 
life  at  the  expense  of  his  divinity.  The  theory  of  pro- 
gressive incarnation  is  not  open  to  so  great  objections. 
It  undoubtedly  gives  a  luminous  and  beautiful  explana- 
tion of  the  facts  of  Christ's  earthly  life.  There  is  some- 
thing novel  and  helpful  in  the  idea  of  the  reciprocity  ex- 
isting between  the  divine  and  human  natures  and  their 
gradual  mutual  interpenetration  and  progressive  union. 
But  Dorner's  view  of  the  constitution  of  the  theanthropic 
person,  which  is  essential  to  the  theory,  gives  rise  to  grave 
doubts.  Christ  does  not  speak  as  if  his  person  went  no 
farther  back  than  the  incarnation.  He  said,  "  The  glory 
which  /  had  with  thee  before  the  world  was."  This  is 
not  a  new  personality,  constituted  by  the  union  of  the  di- 
vine and  the  human  natures  ;  it  is  in  some  true  sense  the 


166  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

personality  of  the  Logos.  If  it  be  urged  that  the  per- 
sonality of  the  Logos  was  not  personality  in  the  full  sense 
of  the  term,  since  it  belongs  to  the  tripersonality  of  the 
Trinity,  which  must  be  subordinated  to  the  unipersonality 
of  God,  still  I  affirm  that  the  personality  of  the  Logos, 
such  as  it  was,  must  have  been  the  central  and  essential 
element  in  the  personality  of  the  God-man.  Dorner's  the- 
ory, like  the  others,  only  partially  solves  the  problem. 

What,  then,  shall  we  say  ?  The  answer  is  plain.  The 
problem  is  insoluble  with  our  present  knowledge.  Each 
of  the  theories  is  valuable  as  far  as  we  can  make  it  work, 
and  no  farther.  We  acknowledge  the  laudable  purpose 
and  the  loyalty  to  scriptural  truth  in  all  of  them.  They 
all  of  them  aim  to  do  justice  to  the  various  elements  of 
tlie  wonderful  doctrine.  Each  emphasizes  a  class  of  facts 
which  the  others  fail  to  bring  into  their  deserved  promi- 
nence. But  the  problem  is  too  great.  It  has,  and  al- 
ways must  have,  its  mysterious  side.  Somehow  or  other, 
in  some  real  and  true  sense,  the  Word  became  flesh.  He 
laid  aside  his  heavenly  glory  and  relinquished  for  a  time 
the  exercise  of  the  divine  attributes.  The  divine  person 
became  a  theanthropic  person.  There  was  a  real  submit- 
ting to  human  limitations.  The  Son  of  God  took  part  in 
some  true  way  in  the  development  of  the  human  Jesus. 
It  was  not  merely  the  human  nature  that  passed  from  in- 
fancy to  childhood,  and  from  childhood  to  youtli  and 
manhood,  that  was  tempted  and  suffered  and  died  and 
rose  again  ;  it  was  the  God-man,  the  divinely  human  per- 
son. It  was  he  who  was  weak,  and  in  some  things  igno- 
rant* It  was  he  who  prayed  to  the  Father.  In  him  God 
had  a  truly  human  experience  and  wrought  out  a  salva- 
tion that  was  the  work  at  once  of  God  and  man.  There 
was  one  consciousness,  covering  an  extent  vastly  greater 
than  ours,  yet  as  truly  one.  During  all  the  state  of  hu- 
miliation tliere  were  reminiscences  of  the  glory  before 
the  world  was,  and  presentiments  of  the  power  and  divine 


CHRISTOLOGICAL   PROBLEMS  167 

majesty  in  the  future.  Such  are  the  facts  which  the  New 
Testament  seems  to  require  us  to  accept.  But  we  admit 
that  we  are  incompetent  to  explain  them.  The  farther 
we  penetrate  into  the  mystery,  the  profounder  it  becomes. 
The  theologian  who  has  pondered  the  subject  for  years, 
and  studied  all  the  theories,  cannot  answer  the  questions 
which  his  own  little  child  puts  to  him. 

lY.  There  still  remains  the  problem  of  the  present 
nature  of  the  Christ.  He  has  ascended  into  gloi-y  and 
sitteth  at  the  right  hand  of  God.  If  the  divine  was  sub- 
ject to  human  limitations  on  earth,  it  is  so  no  longer. 
The  exaltation  of  the  Christ  has  restored  all  that  the  self- 
emptying  took  from  him.  He  is  once  more  in  the  exer- 
cise, as  well  as  in  the  possession,  of  the  divine  attributes. 
But  what  is  the  relation  now  of  the  divine  and  the  hu- 
man in  him  ?  How  does  his  person  stand  related  to  his 
natures?  Undoubtedly  in  the  main  there  has  been  no 
change.  Jesus  Christ  is  the  same  yesterday,  to-day,  and 
forever.  He  is,  and  continuetli  to  be,  God  and  man,  in 
two  natures  and  one  person  forever.  All  the  wealth  of 
his  human  experience  is  preserved,  and  through  his  man- 
hood he  is  still  our  merciful  and  faithful  High-Priest. 

But  have  his  divine  attributes  been  communicated  to 
his  human  nature  ?  He  promised  his  disciples  that  he 
would  be  with  them  always,  even  unto  the  end  of  the 
world  (Matt,  xxviii.  20).  How  is  this  presence  effected  ? 
Is  the  human  nature  onmipresent  since  the  glorification 
of  Christ  ?  So  say  the  Lutherans,  as  we  have  already 
seen,  moved  thereto  by  their  doctrine  of  the  Loixl's  Sup- 
per. That  Christ's  human  nature  should  be  present  in  a 
true  sense  in  a  thousand  worshipping  assemblies  at  the 
same  time,  and  communicated  to  every  one  who  partakes 
of  the  consecrated  bread  and  wine,  this  must  be  the  case. 
And  even  though  we  may  hold  a  wholly  different  doc- 
trine of  the  sacrament,  there  is  much  in  the  theory  of 
Christ's  human  omnipresence  to  commend  it  to  our  accept- 


168  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

ance.  The  ordinary  view  in  our  branch  of  the  Protes- 
tant church  is  tliat  Clirist  is  present  only  by  his  Spirit. 
His  humanity  is  circumscribed  and  local.  It  is  now  in 
heaven,  the  place  where  God  manifests  His  highest  glory. 
It  is  as  truly  absent  from  us  as  are  our  friends  who  have 
passed  from  earth  and  gone  to  be  with  him.  We  ask, 
what  it  means  for  Christ  to  be  with  us  by  his  Spirit  ?  Is 
it  not  a  real  presence  ?  When  he  dwells  in  our  hearts  by 
faith  (Eph.  iii.  17),  is  it  not  a  real  indwelling  ?  Is  he  in 
reality  far  from  us  in  his  humanity  ?  And  so  to  those 
who  think  most  deeply  on  this  subject,  and  with  most 
real  longing  for  personal  communion  with  the  human 
Christ,  the  Lutheran  view  has  great  attractiveness,  even 
though  they  may  not  see  their  way  clear  to  accept  it. 
But  when  all  is  said,  we  find  that  we  are  once  more  in  the 
realm  of  mystery.  That  Christ  is  with  us  in  his  human- 
ity we  know.  But  how  it  is  effected  we  do  not  know. 
We  must  accept  the  fact  in  the  silence  of  faith  and  leave 
its  explanation  to  the  time  of  fuller  knowledge. 

And  so  it  is  with  all  the  aspects  of  this  wonderful  doc- 
trine of  Christ.  It  stands  alone,  a  fact  unmatched  in  the 
whole  realm  of  knowledge.  As  has  been  truly  said,  we 
cannot  explain  it  because  it  is  unique,  because  there  are 
no  other  facts  of  the  same  class  with  which  we  may  com- 
pare it.  If  we  take  it  as  a  mere  doctrine,  that  is,  as  a 
series  of  propositions,  it  is  easy  enough.  We  can  readily 
string  together  the  words  that  define  and  describe  the 
person  of  Clirist,  thinking  we  understand  them  because 
they  are  logically  combined.  But  it  is  different  when  we 
think  deeply  upon  the  fact.  It  is  fact,  the  reality  of 
which  we  cannot  doubt.  It  rests  upon  a  solid  historical 
basis  in  the  scriptural  record ,  We  cannot  explain  the  life 
and  character  of  Jesus  upon  any  other  assumption  than 
that  of  his  divinity.  But  the  fact  itself,  how  wonderful, 
how  passing  knowledge !  We  accept  it,  not  because  we 
can  explain  it,  but  because  it  explains  everything  else. 


CHRISTOLOGICAL   PROBLEMS  16D 

And  so  we  leave  the  paths  of  the  intellect,  which  carry  us 
into  darkness  and  mystery,  and  follow  the  humbler  but 
brighter  path  of  Christian  faith,  striving  to  know  the 
Saviour  personally  and  to  live  in  his  strength.  In  this 
way  there  is  the  certainty  of  higher  knowledge.  The  life 
of  love  and  faith  opens  vistas  through  which  we  see  deep 
into  the  heart  of  the  mystery.  Now  we  know  in  part 
and  prophesy  in  part.  But  it  shall  not  always  be  so. 
We  have  the  promise  that  at  last  we  shall  "  see  him  as  he 
is"  (1  John  iii.  2).  When  that  which  is  perfect  is  come, 
that  which  is  in  part  shall  be  done  away.  So  let  us  wait 
in  patience. 


RELATION  OF  CHRIST  TO  GOD  AND  THE  CREATION 

Every  thinking  man  must  have  some  theory  of  the 
first  principles  and  causes  of  things,  and  when  he  puts 
it  into  systematic  form  and  applies  it  to  the  different 
spheres  of  being— the  Infinite,  the  world,  and  man — it 
becomes  a  philosophy.  Paul  thus  sets  forth  his  philos- 
ophy :  "  For  by  him  were  all  things  created,  that  are 
in  heaven,  and  that  are  on  earth,  visible  and  invisible, 
whether  they  be  thrones,  or  dominions,  or  principalities, 
or  powers  :  all  things  were  created  by  him,  and  for  him. 
And  he  is  before  all  things  and  by  him  all  things  consist, 
and  he  is  the  head  of  the  body,  the  church :  who  is  the 
beginning,  the  first-born  from  the  dead ;  that  in  all  things 
he  might  have  the  pre-eminence  "  (Col.  i.  16-18).  The 
apostle,  true  to  the  Gospel  which  he  preached,  finds  his 
explanation  of  things  in  redemption,  and  in  him  who  is  at 
once  the  source,  the  agent,  and  the  goal  of  redemption, 
Jesus  the  Christ.  In  his  conception  the  facts  and  truths 
of  the  universe  center  in  the  Redeemer.  He  is  the  Me- 
diator who  binds  together  God,  the  higher  intelligences, 
the  world,  and  humanity.  In  him  are  hid  all  the  treas- 
ures of  wisdom  and  knowledge  (Col.  ii.  3).  Over  against 
the  "  wisdom  of  this  world,"  the  lore  of  the  Jewish  Rab- 
bins, and  the  philosophies  of  Greece  and  Rome,  Paul  sets 
"Christ,  the  wisdom  of  God"  (1  Cor.  i.  20,  24). 

But  it  is  not  my  purpose  at  this  time  to  present  the 
doctrine  of  Christ  as  a  philosophy.  Rather  I  desire  to 
bring  out   some  aspects   of  the   doctrine,  thus   far   only 


RELATION  OF  CHRIST  TO  GOD  AND  THE  CREATION     171 

touched  upon,  that  are  connected  with  tlie  relations  in 
which  the  Saviour  stands  to  God  and  the  creation.  Nev- 
ertheless, I  shall  be  glad  if  an  incidental  result  of  our  dis- 
cussion shall  be  to  emphasize  the  fact  which  is  essential  to 
the  idea  of  the  doctrine  as  a  philosophy,  that  Christ  is  the 
key  to  the  great  problems  of  the  universe.  It  is  thus  that 
we  shall  best  prove  the  reasonableness  of  this  central  fact 
of  the  Cliristian  system.  Like  all  the  great  fundamental 
truths  with  which  the  human  mind  has  to  do,  it  is  rooted 
in  mystery.  We  saw  this  when,  in  the  last  discourse, 
we  examined  the  important  Christological  problems  and 
frankly  admitted  our  inability  to  solve  them.  But  the 
doctrine  of  Christ,  though  it  may  be  in  itself  mysterious, 
evidences  its  reasonableness  by  the  light  it  throws  upon 
other  facts.  It  is  like  the  sun,  into  which  we  cannot  look 
for  its  excess  of  brightness,  but  which  is  the  light  of  all 
our  seeing. 

I.  We  consider,  first,  the  relation  of  Christ  to  God. 

He  is  the  eternal  Son,  the  Word,  the  Image,  of  God. 
Doubtless  these  terms  are  used  in  part  to  describe  God's 
relation  to  the  world.  But  they  convey  also  a  deeper 
meaning,  giving  us  a  glimpse,  though  imperfect,  into  the 
internal  life  of  God.  Especially  is  this  the  case  with  the 
term  Son.  It  points  to  an  eternal  fact  in  the  divine  ex- 
istence. There  is  Fatherhood  and  Son  ship  in  God.  There 
is  a  relation  which  finds  its  best  analogy  and  expression  in 
the  words  which  describe  one  of  the  closest  and  tender- 
est  of  earthly  relations.  What  are  the  essential  character- 
istics of  the  bond  which  exists  between  the  human  father 
and  son  ?  A  common  nature,  love,  fellowship,  community 
of  purpose  and  act.  Such  is  the  relation  of  the  divine 
Father  and  Son.  The  Deity  is  not  a  bare  unity.  There 
is  in  it  a  fulness  of  life.  There  is  a  reciprocity  and  in- 
tercourse of  love,  a  mutual  dependence,  a  unity  which  is 
a  union  of  differences.  But  shall  we  push  the  analogy 
further  ?     The  human    child  owes   his   existence  to   his 


172  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

father.  Is  it  ho  with  the  divine  Son  ?  We  cannot  ad- 
mit an  absohite  beginning.  That  would  carry  us  back  to 
the  old  Arian  heresy.  But  many  Orthodox  theologians 
have  taught  an  eternal  generation  of  the  Son — and  liave 
darkened  the  subject  by  words  which  convey  no  intelli- 
gible meaning.  Again,  the  human  son  is  a  distinct  person 
from  tlie  parent.  They  possess  a  common  nature  but  not 
tlie  same  nature.  And  at  first  it  seems  as  though  we 
might  find  the  same  distinction  between  the  divine  Father 
and  Son.  But,  as  we  shall  see,  when  we  come  to  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity,  these  two  possess  the  same  essence, 
and  though  we  call  them  "  First  Person  "  and  "  Second 
Person,"  we  do  so  in  a  technical  theological  sense,  which 
is  not  the  same  as  that  in  which  the  term  person  is  com- 
monly employed.  We  maintain  the  tri/personality  of 
God  only  so  far  as  it  is  consistent  with  the  unijpersonality 
of  God.  All  the  great  theologians,  from  the  days  of 
Angustin,  have  admitted  the  inadequacy  of  this  word  per- 
son. But  let  us  not  think  that  the  Father  and  the  Son 
are  less  than  persons.  Rather  we  have  here  a  relation 
which  transcends  our  conceptions  of  personality.  And  we 
are  to  hold  fast  to  the  terms  Father  and  Son  as  bringing 
us  nearest  to  the  understanding  of  the  transcendent  fact. 

The  title  which  John  applies  to  the  pre-existent  Christ, 
the  Word,  directs  our  thought  chiefly  to  the  self-revelation 
of  God,  yet  it  does  not  exhaust  its  meaning  in  the  exter- 
nal relation  of  revelation.  When  he  says  that  the  Word 
"  was  in  the  beginning  with  God  "  (John  i.  1,  2)  he  points 
to  an  eternal  inward  relation.  The  Word  is  the  vehicle 
of  our  thought.  It  is,  so  to  speak,  the  objectified  thought. 
Max  Miiller  has  recently  written  a  book  to  prove  that 
thought  is  impossible  without  words.  And  whether  or 
not  he  goes  too  far,  yet  this  at  least  we  may  say,  that 
there  is  little  thought  which  is  not  either  in  words  or 
what  stands  for  words.  When  we  think  a  subject  over, 
we  put  it  into  words  and  see  how  it  looks.     The  word  is  a 


RELATION  OF  CHRIST  TO  GOD  AND  THE  CREATION     173 

man's  alter  Ego,  his  other  self.  So  was  the  Word  the  eter- 
nal self-expression  of  the  Deity,  the  objectified  thought 
of  God,  His  other  self,  ilis  companion.  It  was  in  the 
mirror  of  the  Word  that  God  saw  His  eternal  plan  re- 
flected. We  come  back  to  that  relation  of  confidence 
and  love  and  mutual  intercourse  which  the  term  Son  ex- 
presses. Son  and  Word  suggest  different  aspects  of  the 
same  ineffable  truth. 

There  remains  the  designation  of  the  pre-existent 
Christ  as  the  Image  of  God.  This  also  seems  to  apply 
not  only  to  the  revelation  of  God,  but  also  to  His  internal 
being.  The  idea  it  suggests  is  not  unlike  that  conveyed 
by  the  term  Word.  In  His  image  God  sees  Himself  and 
finds,  as  it  were,  another  self.  Here  once  more  is  the 
intercourse  and  reciprocity  of  love.  We  take  the  three 
together— Son,  Word,  Image — and  find  in  them  the  cer- 
tainty and  the  sufficient,  if  not  complete,  expression,  of 
the  mysterious  relation  of  the  Son  to  the  Father. 

The  language  I  have  used  may  have  seemed  to  imply  a 
reference  solely  to  the  pre-existent  Christ.  But  this  was 
not  my  meaning.  The  exalted  Christ,  the  God-man,  sit- 
ting to-day  npon  the  throne  of  majesty  above,  so  far  as 
his  divine  nature  is  concerned,  stands  in  this  relation  to 
God.  He  is  still  the  Son,  the  Word,  the  uncreated 
Image.  But  this  is  not  the  whole.  He  is  man  as  well  as 
God,  and  his  two  natures  are  bound  together  in  the  unity 
of  his  theanthropic  person.  And  this  means  that  in  some 
ineifable  but  real  way,  humanity  has  been  taken  into  the 
life  of  the  Deity,  and  that  not  temporarily  but  forever. 
We  talk  of  the  marvels  of  the  Gospel.  It  is  a  marvel 
that  God  should  have  stooped  to  redeem  mankind,  that 
He  should  become  incarnate,  that  for  thirty-three  years 
He  should  have  experienced  the  vicissitudes  of  human 
life,  that  He  should  have  tasted  death,  in  the  dying  of 
the  Christ.  It  is  a  marvel  that  we  should  be  forgiven 
and  assured  of  salvation.     It  is  a  marvel  that  God  should 


174  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

take  np  His  abode  in  our  sinful  hearts  through  the  Holy 
Spirit,  that  we  might  become  "  partakers  of  the  divine 
nature "  (2  Pet.  i.  4).  It  is  a  marvel  that  God  should 
permit  us  to  dwell  forever  with  Him.  But  an  incompara- 
bly greater  marvel  is  this  eternal  union  of  the  Deity  witli 
manhood  in  the  person  of  the  Christ.  Man  shares  the 
counsels  of  God.  Man  sits  upon  the  throne  of  power. 
Man  wields  the  sceptre  of  government.  Our  great  High- 
priest  is  the  Man,  who  suffered  and  died,  who  on  earth 
was  tempted  in  all  points  like  as  we  are.  We  talk  of  the 
dignity  of  manhood.  Here  is  the  foundation  of  it  all.  It 
is  because  through  Christ  our  humanity  is  thus  forever 
united  with  God,  that  we  may  hope  to  be  forever  with 
Him.  The  manhood  of  the  God-man  is  the  great  magnet 
in  the  center  of  the  universe  which  is  drawing  all  men 
unto  it.  The  Christian  sees  the  true  humanity  there  in 
Christ,  and  he  is  dead,  and  his  life  is  hid  with  Christ  in 
God  (Col.  iii.  3). 

And  then,  the  Christ  is  the  revelation  of  God.  The 
terms  which  we  have  discussed  in  their  reference  to  the 
internal  relations  of  God  all  have  their  outward  look  as 
well.  The  Son  is  the  Father's  messenger.  The  Word 
makes  known  the  divine  nature  and  purpose,  and  does  the 
divine  work.  The  Image  bodies  forth  the  divine  being. 
In  reality  the  two  facts  stand  in  the  closest  connection. 
It  is  because  the  Son  stands  in  his  own  peculiar  rela- 
tion to  the  Deity  in  its  internal  nature  that  he  becomes 
the  principle  of  revelation.  Only  God  can  reveal  God. 
There  can  be  no  intei'mediary  that  is  of  a  lower  essence 
than  God.  And  only  God  can  perform  the  divine  work 
of  redemption.  The  Mediator  must  be  divine.  For  he 
comes  not  merely  with  a  knowledge  about  God,  but  with 
the  actual  manifestation  of  the  divine  nature  and  power. 
It  is  not,  however,  the  divine  Son  alone  who  is  the  Re- 
vealer  and  Saviour.  It  is  the  Christ,  the  God-man,  the 
incarnate  Son.     Manhood  was  made  receptive  of  the  di- 


KELATION  OF  CHRIST  TO  GOD  AND  THE  CREATION     175 

vine.  It  was  created  not  only  by  Clirist  bnt  for  Christ. 
The  revelation  which  Christ  makes  is  of  the  divine  in 
humanity,  of  the  Infinite  in  the  finite.  He  gives  a  pict- 
ure and  representation  of  God,  as  it  were,  in  miniature. 
The  divine  Son  works  out  a  perfect  human  sonship  in  his 
human  nature,  so  that  when  the  testimony  came  from  the 
opened  heavens,  ''  This  is  my  beloved  Son  in  whom  I  am 
well  pleased"  (Matt.  iii.  17),  it  was  one  theanthropic  son- 
ship  that  was  meant,  the  divine  Sonship  expressed  in  a 
perfect  human  sonship.  So  the  uncreated  Image  of  God 
was  stamped  upon  the  humanity  in  such  a  way  as  to  make 
a  perfect  human  image  of  God.  Man  was  created  at  first 
in  the  divine  image  and  sin  marred  the  work.  Christ 
restored  it  in  his  own  humanity.  And  then,  the  divine 
Word  found  utterance  in  those  human  words  such  as 
never  man  spake. 

It  was  a  wonderful  method  of  self-revelation  which 
God  chose,  the  method  of  the  incarnation.  While  he  was 
still  on  earth,  in  his  state  of  humiliation,  Christ  could  say, 
"  He  that  hath  seen  me  hath  seen  the  Father  "  (John  xiv. 
9).  To  everyone  who  had  the  spiritual  eyes  to  see  him  as 
he  was,  he  was  God  on  earth.  His  character,  his  words, 
his  acts  all  bore  the  impress  of  the  divine  upon  them. 
And  still  more  should  he  be  to  us  who  live  in  these  latter 
days  the  revelation  of  the  divine.  For  now  he  is  upon 
the  throne.  We  see  him  as  he  is.  We  can  take  that  mar- 
vellous picture  of  his  earthly  life  which  the  New  Testa- 
ment records,  and  add  to  it  the  personal  knowledge  of 
the  Saviour  which  has  come  to  us  through  the  experience 
of  his  gracious  presence  and  power.  In  the  synthesis  of 
a  living  faith  the  Christ,  who  eighteen  centuries  ago 
walked  with  weary  feet  the  rough  roads  of  Palestine,  and 
the  King  in  his  glory,  the  Messiah  of  God,  are  one.  It  is 
our  privilege  to  receive  the  answer  to  the  Apostle's  prayer, 
"  That  Christ  may  dwell  in  your  hearts  by  faith  "  (Eph. 
iii.  17). 


176  PRESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

To  know  God  is  the  great  need  of  mankind  ;  not  to 
know  Him  merely  in  an  intellectual  way,  but  in  that  per- 
sonal and  spiritual  knowledge  which  John  says  is  eternal 
life  (John  xvii.  3).  For  this  the  soul  cries  out.  For  such 
knowledge  the  world  has  longed  and  labored  and  sought 
during  all  the  ages  of  human  history.  How  little  has  been 
the  success !  What  conceptions  have  not  men  formed  of 
God  !  Every  absurdity  of  which  men  are  capable,  every 
atrocity  which  the  devil's  ingenuity  has  ever  devised,  has 
been  ascribed  to  our  Creator  and  Father.  In  Jesus  Christ 
mankind  has  received  the  perfect  revelation.  Here  and 
here  alone  is  the  truth  in  its  simplicity  and  its  greatness. 

II.  Let  us  now  look  for  a  moment  at  the  relation  in 
which  Christ  stands  to  the  higher  intelligences  of  the 
universe.  The  existence  of  such  beings  is  clearly  taught 
by  the  Scriptures.  They  are  the  invisible  background  of 
the  redemptive  revelation,  coming  into  visibility  at  all 
its  great  crises.  I  speak  of  the  angels  as  higher  intel- 
ligences. In  some  respects  they  are  higher,  in  others 
lower,  than  man.  In  power  and  purity  they  are  above 
him,  fit  to  dwell  in  the  presence  of  the  Most  High  and  do 
His  bidding.  When  Christ  taught  us  to  pray,  "  Thy  will 
be  done  in  earth  as  it  is  in  heaven,"  he  set  the  angels 
before  us  as  a  model.  But  in  other  respects  the  angels 
are  lower  than  men.  They  are  pure  spirits.  They  do  not, 
therefore,  stand  in  those  manifold  relations  to  the  mate- 
rial world  which  belong  to  man,  who  is  at  once  spirit  and 
body.  If  organization  is  a  test  of  rank  in  the  hierarchy 
of  the  universe,  man  stands  above  the  angels.  Of  him 
it  can  be  said,  as  it  cannot  of  the  angels,  that  he  is  the 
microcosm,  the  universe  in  miniature,  for  in  him  all  the 
spheres  and  departments  of  the  universe  find  their  living 
center.     Martensen  has  truly  said  : 

"  Although  the  angel,  in  i-elation  to  man,  is  the  more 
powerful  spirit,  man's  spirit  is  nevertheless  the  richer  and 


RELATION  OF  CHRIST  TO  GOD  AND  THE  CREATION     177 

the  more  comprehensive.  For  the  angel  in  all  his  power 
is  only  the  expression  of  a  single  one  of  all  those  phases 
which  man,  in  the  inward  nature  of  his  soul,  and  the  rich- 
ness of  his  own  individuality,  is  intended  to  combine  into 
a  complete  and  perfect  microcosm  "  ("  Dogmatics,"  Eng. 
trans.,  p.  132;  see  the  whole  passage,  pp.  127-136,  to 
which  1  would  express  my  obligations). 


The  divine  Son  "  took  not  on  him  the  nature  of  angels ; 
but  he  took  on  him  the  seed  of  Abraham  "  (Heb.  ii.  16). 
In  these  high  beings  the  law  of  service  is  perfected. 
They  are  "  ministering  spirits,  sent  forth  to  minister  for 
them  who  shall  be  heirs  of  salvation  "  (Heb.  i.  14). 
They  live  not  for  themselves  but  to  do  the  work  of  God's 
kingdom. 

To  the  angels  Christ  stands  in  an  original  and  intimate 
relation.  He  created  them  and  assigned  them  their  rank 
and  place  in  the  universe.  They  attended  him  in  all  his 
earthly  life  and  ministry.  They  are  his  messengers  and 
ministers  in  his  heavenly  glory.  His  redemptive  work 
has  broken  the  power  of  Satan  and  his  kingdom  of  fallen 
angels.  They  are  to  appear  before  his  judgment-seat 
and  receive  their  final  doom  (2  Pet.  ii.  4 ;  Jude  6). 
The  same  redemption  is  to  bring  together  in  blessed  rec- 
onciliation all  things  in  heaven  and  on  earth,  and  to  sum 
them  up  in  him  (Col.  i.  20  ;  Eph.  i.  10).  At  the  name 
of  Jesus  every  knee  shall  bow,  of  things  in  heaven,  and 
things  in  earth,  and  things  under  the  earth,  and  every 
tongue  confess  that  Jesus  Christ  is  Lord,  to  the  glory  of 
God  the  Father  (Phil.  ii.  10,  11). 

ni.  We  come  to  the  relation  of  Christ  to  the  world. 
It  would  have  been  a  bold  claim  on  the  part  of  the 
apostles,  had  they  not  been  guided  by  the  Spirit  of  reve- 
lation, that  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  the  man  who  went  about 
with  them  in  the  days  of  Pilate's  Procuratorship,  was  the 
Maker  of  the  universe.  But  this  was  what  they  asserted. 
12 


178  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

For  they  held  that  united  with  that  manhood  and  behind 
that  veil  of  flesh  was  the  Creator  Himself.  When  they 
looked  upward  to  Christ,  the  King  upon  the  throne,  they 
recognized  in  him  the  power  and  wisdom  that  called  the 
universe  into  being,  No  language  could  be  more  explicit 
than  that  of  John,  who  gives  this  truth  the  foremost 
place  in  his  Gospel,  the  unknown  author  of  the  epistle 
to  the  Hebrews,  who  likewise  presents  the  facts  in  the 
opening  words  of  his  book,  and  Paul,  who  makes  it  an  es- 
sential element  in  his  Christian  philosophy.  Cuiisider 
what  it  means.  Think  of  the  immensity  of  the  planet 
on  which  we  live.  Then  take  your  flight  in  tliought 
across  the  ninety  millions  of  miles  between  us  and  the 
sun.  Then  pass  from  star  to  star,  where  all  measure- 
ment fails,  beyond  the  farthest  point  of  light  the  tele- 
scope reveals.  He  made  it  all,  the  Word  who  became 
flesh  and  dwelt  among  us,  the  Being  who  in  his  divinely 
human  person  is  to-day  our  King  and  Saviour,  our  elder 
Brother.  Or  if  our  minds  are  confused  by  the  thought 
of  greatness  in  space,  consider  the  infinite  complexity 
and  beauty  of  the  smallest  organism,  as  the  microscope 
discloses  it  to  us.  And  then,  he  not  only  made,  but 
he  upholds  and  guides  thein  all.  "  In  him  all  things 
consist "  (Col.  i.  17).  He  has  held  together  from  the 
first  this  universe  of  atoms  and  forces.  He  has  been 
the  soin-ce  of  all  enei-gy  and  activity  and  life,  the  life  of 
the  natural  world  as  he  is  the  life  of  the  soul  (John  i.  4). 
It  is  his  wisdom  that  has  been  displayed  in  the  progress 
of  evolution  out  of  the  primitive  chaos  into  the  cosmos, 
the  building  of  the  planetary  system,  the  shaping  of  our 
earth,  the  formation  of  its  physical  features,  the  develop- 
ment of  its  living  forms,  the  long,  slow,  wonderful  pro- 
cess of  upward-climbing  movement  from  the  protozoon 
to  the  man.  Christ,  the  Word  who  became  flesh.  The 
words  come  too  easily,  and  our  thought  cannot  keep  pace 
with  them.     We  believe  it  but  we  do  not  realize  it.     It  is 


RELATION  OF  CHRIST  TO  GOD  AND  THE  CREATION     179 

at  once  the  strongest  argument  against  Christianity  and 
the  strongest  argument  for  it.  To  the  understanding  it 
is  impossible,  mere  vaunt  of  good-liearted  but  weak-minded 
Christians.  But  there  is  a  divine  audacity  in  the  doctrine 
which  to  the  spiritual  mind  is  the  proof  of  its  truth.  Here 
is  a  pass-key  which  opens  so  many  locks  that  we  cannot 
discard  it.  It  is  because  Christ  explains  everything  that 
we  believe  him  indeed  Lord  of  all  things.  When  his  sun 
rises,  the  shadows  flee  away. 

The  world  was  made  that  it  might  be  the  theatre  for 
Christ's  redemptive  work.  Looking  at  the  subject  broad- 
ly, we  may  say  that  the  whole  universe  was  made  for  this 
purpose  ;  for,  as  we  have  seen,  all  orders  of  being  are  con- 
cerned in  some  way  or  other  with  redemption.  But  more 
particularly  our  own  earth  was  made  for  this  end.  Here 
God's  kingdom  was  to  be  established.  Here  the  divine 
Son  was  to  become  incarnate,  to  live  and  die.  Unbeliev- 
ers often  declare  that  Christianity  has  lost  its  meaning, 
since  the  Ptolemaic  system  of  astronomy  has  given  place 
to  the  Copernican.  Christianity  makes  this  planet  the 
center  of  the  universe,  the  object  of  God's  especial  love, 
upon  which  His  greatest  efforts  have  been  expended.  But 
science  has  shown  that  the  earth  is  but  an  insignificant 
speck  in  the  fathomless  depths  of  space,  an  unimportant 
satellite  of  one  of  the  lesser  suns.  Some  of  our  modern 
apologists  have  been  at  great  pains  to  prove,  and  with  not 
a  little  plausibility  of  argument,  that  the  earth  is  the  only 
planet  in  our  system  habitable  by  beings  like  ourselves, 
and  that  there  is  little  reason  to  suppose  that  the  other 
heavenly  bodies  possess  systems  of  planets  like  our  own 
(Ebrard,  "Christian  Apologetics,"  Eng.  trans.,  vol.  i.,  pp. 
353-365).  It  is  not  the  size  of  our  earth  or  its  position  in 
the  universe  which  gives  it  its  importance.   The  poet  says, 

'*  Better  fifty  years  of  Europe  than  a  cycle  of  Cathay." 


180  PKESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

So  we  may  say,  "  Better  a  little  world  like  ours  with  man 
on  it  and  God  purposing  to  redeem  it,  than  a  thousand  suns 
each  a  thousand  times  the  size  of  ours."  And  even  sup- 
posing that  the  other  worlds  were  all  inhabited,  it  would 
not  prove  that  this  earth  was  not  of  more  importance 
in  God's  sight  than  all  the  rest.  God's  standard  of  im- 
portance, as  it  has  been  revealed  to  us  in  the  Gospel, 
is  very  different  from  ours.  The  greatest  need  lays  the 
greatest  claim  upon  His  love.  Just  as  there  is  joy  in 
heaven  over  one  sinner  that  repenteth,  more  than  over 
ninety  and  nine  just  persons  which  need  no  repentance 
(Luke  XV.  7),  so  there  may  be  joy  in  God's  heart  to  la- 
bor for  the  redemption  of  one  sinful  world  like  ours,  com- 
pared with  which  his  rejoicing  over  a  thousand  unfallen 
worlds  is  as  nothing.  And  were  there  a  thousand  fallen 
worlds  in  which  God  had  manifested  Himself  as  the  Re- 
deemer through  Christ,  each  of  them  would  be  a  center,  in 
which  the  love  and  efforts  and  hopes  and  sympathies  of 
God  and  all  holy  beings  would  be  bound  up.  We  shall  not 
let  science,  with  all  its  unquestionable  truths,  rob  us  of 
the  meaning  of  those  sublime  words,  "  God  so  loved  the 
world  that  He  gave  His  only-begotten  Son  "  (John  iii.  16). 
It  is  this  destination  of  the  M'orld  to  be  the  theatre  of 
Christ's  redemption  that  explains  the  existence  of  what  is 
otherwise  an  insoluble  mystery,  namely  suffering,  disease, 
and  death.  God  knew  that  men  would  become  sinners, 
and  He  intended  to  provide  salvation  for  them.  And  so 
He  arranged  things  in  such  a  way  that  this  world  should 
be  a  place  of  discipline  and  trial.  Suifering  and  death 
wei'e  the  check  upon  sin  which  He  provided,  the  means  of 
spiritual  growth,  the  punishment  for  incorrigible  wrong- 
doing. In  a  world  that  was  to  be  sinless  they  would  have 
been  an  anomaly.  In  a  world  of  sin,  where  redemption 
was  to  be  the  great  object  of  God's  activities,  tliey  are  a 
blessing.  The  divine  Word  who  created  this  world,  es- 
tablished that  law  of  suffering  and  death  which  was  to 


RELATION  OF  CHRIST  TO  GOD  AND  THE  CREATION     181 

afford  the  means  of  his  own  atoning  work  when  he  should 
become  incarnate  in  the  Christ.  From  the  first  tlie  "  sign 
of  the  Son  of  man,"  the  mark  of  the  cross,  has  been  on 
the  earth.  The  fossils  of  the  oldest  rocks  are  in  a  true 
sense  types  of  the  Christ ;  they  prophecy  the  Saviour's 
death. 

The  doctrine  of  Christ  and  his  redemption  emphasizes 
the  difference  between  Christianity  and  most  of  the  hea- 
then religions  and  philosophies  in  their  view  of  the  ma- 
terial world.  Heathenism  regarded  matter  as  evil ;  re- 
demption consisted  in  deliverance  from  it.  Christ  teaches 
us  the  excellency  of  matter.  Christ  made  it,  in  the  per- 
son of  the  Logos.  He  manifested  his  relation  to  it  when 
"  the  Word  became  flesh."  It  is  a  matter  of  no  small  im- 
portance that  Christ  on  his  human  side  became  a  link  in 
the  chain  of  evolution.  Though  he  was  divine,  and  though 
his  human  birth  was  a  miracle,  entirely  out  of  the  sphere 
of  natural  development,  yet  he  condescended  to  enter  into 
the  realm  of  nature.  He  took  to  himself  matter,  an  ani- 
mal nature,  a  human  nature.  In  the  light  of  the  incarna- 
tion let  no  man  call  the  material  world  common  or  un- 
clean. Christ  has  shown  us  its  true  character.  And  as  he 
thus  entered  nature  and  eternally  linked  himself  with  it, 
so  he  gave  the  assurance  of  the  redemption  even  of  physi- 
cal nature.  We  have  touched  upon  the  subject  already. 
We  shall  come  to  it  again  in  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrec- 
tion. But  the  fact  cannot  be  too  often  asserted  and  em- 
phasized. There  is  no  physical  disorder  that  shall  not 
be  righted,  no  evil  that  shall  not  be  overcome.  This  is 
Christ's  world,  not  the  Devil's  world.  The  pledge  of  his 
ownership  and  its  final  regeneration  is  the  material  body 
of  the  glorified  Christ.  At  the  Last  Day  he  is  to  return 
in  like  manner  as  he  ascended  into  Heaven  (Acts  i.  11),  to 
complete  the  redemption  of  the  material  world,  as  well  as 
the  redemption  of  the  race. 

IV.  This  brings  us  to  the  relation  of  Christ  to  mankind. 


182  PRESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

TJie  divine  Word  was  not  only  the  Creator  of  the  higher 
intelligences  and  the  world,  bnt  also  of  man.  In  an  es- 
pecial sense  he  was  the  creator  of  man,  since  he  made  him 
in  the  image  of  God,  and  he,  as  we  have  seen,  was  the 
eternal  uncreated  Image  of  God.  As  men,  we  bear  the 
image  of  the  Son.  It  is  in  virtue  of  this  fact  that  we  are 
by  birthright  the  sons,  the  children,  of  God.  Since  from 
the  first  God  knew  that  men  would  sin  and  that  thus  the 
image  of  God  in  them  would  be  defaced,  the  birthright  of 
sonship  renounced,  the  Logos  made  man  that  he  might  be 
redeemed.  The  manhood  which  he  made  was  the  man- 
hood in  which  he  was  to  become  incarnate,  that  he  might 
restore  the  marred  image  and  give  men  back  their  lost 
sonship.  God  sent  His  Son  that  we  might  receive  the 
adoption  of  sons  (Gal.  iv.  4,  5). 

I  pass  over  the  work  of  the  Logos  for  mankind  befoi-e 
liis  incarnation,  to  which  reference  has  been  made  in  a 
previous  chaptei',  and  come  to  his  earthly  life  as  the  God- 
man, 

He  was  the  ideal  man.  The  perfect  manhood  which 
was  in  the  thought  of  God,  when  He  through  the  Logos 
created  the  first  member  of  the  race,  was  wrought  out  and 
realized  in  the  life  of  the  Christ.  Adam  never  attained 
this  ideal.  He  was  indeed  created  sinless  and  destined 
for  the  good.  He  was  "  very  good  "  (Gen.  i.  31)  in  the 
sense  that  no  evil  had  yet  entered  into  his  life  to  mar  it. 
But  he  stood  at  the  beginning  of  his  career  when  he  fell. 
He  was  but  a  child,  far  from  having  reached  the  maturity 
of  manhood  in  God's  kingdom,  which  lay  in  the  divine 
ideal.  Men,  since  him,  have  been  imperfect  specimens  of 
humanity.  Only  one  man  has  ever  begun  at  the  begin- 
ning and  gone  steadily  forward  to  the  goal,  and  that  man 
was  the  Christ,  the  Second  Adam.  It  was  in  the  moral 
character  and  development  of  Christ  that  he  especially 
exhibited  the  true  manhood.  There  is  no  reason  to  be- 
lieve that  he  was  appointed  to  show  forth  in  his  bodily 


RELATION  OF  CHRIST  TO  GOD  AND  THE  CREATION     183 

nature  the  ideal  of  physical  beauty  which  human  art  par- 
tially succeeds  in  representing.  Christ  possessed  a  true 
human  body.  But  it  was  only  after  his  resurrection  that 
it  became  the  glorious  body  to  which  the  believer's  body 
is  finally  to  be  conformed  (Phil.  iii.  21).  Art  has  caught 
only  glimpses  of  the  glory  that  is  to  be.  It  was  the  spir- 
itual beauty  of  the  human  ideal  which  Christ  exhibited 
while  on  earth.  He  lived  entirely  for  the  kingdom  of 
God.  He  realized  the  kingdom  perfectly  in  his  life,  for 
it  was  his  meat  to  do  the  will  of  his  Father  in  heaven,  and 
he  did  it  perfectly,  even  as  it  is  done  in  heaven.  His  re- 
lation to  God  was  that  of  perfect  filial  love.  As  we  have 
already  observed,  the  divine  Son  expressed  his  nature  in 
a  perfect  human  sonship,  the  two  corresponding  to  each 
other  like  the  seal  and  the  impression.  He  loved  man- 
kind with  a  perfect  love.  In  him  were  united  perfect 
self-forgetf ulness  and  perfect  self-sacrifice.  That  spirit  of 
brotherhood  which  is  at  last  to  make  the  race  one  was  ex- 
emplified in  him.  He  possessed  that  many-sidedness  which 
belongs  to  the  highest  ideal  of  manhood.  His  love  and 
interest  took  in  the  whole  world  with  all  its  individuals, 
all  its  spheres  of  activity,  and  all  its  institutions.  Christ 
was  the  most  public-spirited  man  that  ever  lived.  He  was 
not  only  the  redeemer,  but  the  philanthropist  and  the  re- 
former. He  was  the  model  of  the  good  citizen,  while  in 
the  humbler  spheres  of  life  he  was  the  model  son  and 
brother,  the  kind  neighbor,  the  true  and  faithful  friend. 
Then  notice  how  the  elements  were  mixed  in  him,  strength 
of  intellect,  extending  to  marvellous  insight  into  nature 
and  man  ;  strength  of  will,  that  wise,  deliberate  choice  of 
good,  which  is  true  always  to  the  right,  yet  never  runs 
into  wilfulness  or  stubbornness ;  depth  and  tenderness  of 
sensibility.  Christ  blended  the  tenderness  and  gentleness 
of  womanhood  with  the  strength  and  firmness  of  man- 
hood, the  simplicity  of  the  child  with  the  shrewdness  of 
the  man  of  the  world. 


184  PRESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

Christ  attained  this  character  by  passing  through  a  com- 
plete and  wholly  human  moral  development.  He  climbed 
the  ladder  of  moral  perfection  slowly  and  by  discipline. 
He  was  made  perfect  by  suffering  (Heb.  ii.  10).  He 
was  tempted  in  all  points  like  as  we  are.  There  are  those 
who  think  that  such  a  process  of  moral  development 
implies  imperfection  and  sin.  But  this  is  not  the  case. 
There  may  be  growth  where  there  is  no  imperfection. 
Christ  attained  at  each  stage  in  his  moral  development 
the  perfection  appropriate  to  that  stage,  until  he  had 
reached  the  highest.  There  are  some,  also,  who  think 
that  in  order  that  Christ's  experience  should  be  altogether 
human  and  that  he  should  be  able  to  sympathize  with  us 
as  our  High-priest,  he  should  have  had  some  personal  ex- 
perience of  sin.  At  least,  they  say,  he  must  have  been 
born  with  that  sinful  nature  or  those  tendencies  to  sin 
which  all  men  inherit  from  their  ancestors.  But  they  are 
wrong.  The  perfect  manhood  is  a  sinless  manhood,  sinless 
from  the  start,  and  free  from  every  taint  of  sin,  even  an- 
cestral proclivities  to  sin.  That  Christ  might  attain  the 
ideal  of  humanity,  he  must  start  where  Adam  started, 
not  where  we  start,  and  he  must  go  right  onward  without 
tripping  or  falling  till  he  reached  the  goal.  Christ  was 
not  like  us  or  tempted  like  us  in  all  points.  It  was  not 
needful  that  he  should  be.  Or  rather,  it  was  needful  that 
he  should  not  be.  People  have  an  idea  in  these  days  that 
the  reformed  drunkard  can  do  more  for  his  fallen  fellows 
than  he  who  never  fell.  I  doubt  it.  But  however  it  may 
be  with  us,  who  are  sinners  at  the  best,  in  the  case  of 
Christ  the  sinless  development  was  essential  to  his  capaci- 
tation  for  his  saving  work. 

Moreover,  Christ  was — and  in  a  still  higher  sense  is — 
the  universal  man,  the  Head  of  the  race,  the  second 
Adam.  Men  are  made  to  be  under  heads.  There  are 
individuals  everywhere  in  society  who  rule  over  their  fel- 
lows by  a  divine  right.     "  There  is  no  power  but  of  God ; 


RELATION  OF  CHRIST  TO  GOD  AND  THE  CREATION     185 

and  the  powers  that  be  are  ordained  of  God  "  (Rom.  xiii. 
1).  In  the  family,  in  the  state,  in  society,  in  business,  in 
literature,  in  art,  there  must  be  leaders.  The  solidarity 
of  men  includes  not  only  their  union  but  their  union  un- 
der individual  men.  The  qualifications  for  headship  in 
humanity  are  twofold — natural  endowment  and  character. 
A  man  who  is  to  be  a  leader  of  his  fellows  must  be  a  born 
leader.  He  must  have  a  many-sided  nature,  a  strong  will, 
a  large  and  capable  intellect,  quick  sensibilities  and  sym- 
pathies. The  majority  of  men  are  born  to  follow  the  lead 
of  others.  Kot  one  in  a  thousand  has  the  qualities  which 
enable  him  to  think  and  act  for  himself,  to  say  nothing  of 
his  thinking  and  acting  for  others.  But  the  born  leader 
is  a  king  from  his  infancy.  The  children  in  their  plays 
follow  his  lead.  But  leadership  demands  something  more 
than  natural  qualifications.  Character  gives  the  finishing 
to  what  nature  begins.  Character  is  the  man's  own,  the 
outcome  of  his-fi'ee  will.  It  lies  in  the  great  life-choices 
which  he  makes  and  the  habits  which  he  forms  in  ac- 
cordance with  these  choices.  Character  begins  in  self- 
conquest.  He  who  will  rule  must  first  reduce  the  realm 
within  to  subjection.  The  true  king  is  he  who  has  the 
kingdom  of  God  set  up  in  his  soul,  a  kingdom  in  which 
he  is  a  humble  subject.  Even  worldly  selfishness  catches 
something  of  the  secret  of  greatness  and  prudently  denies 
itself  that  it  may  thus  gain  influence  over  men.  But  in 
every  case  there  is  the  deliberate  choice  of  great  ends  and 
a  long  process  of  self-discipline  by  which  the  character 
thus  established  is  confirmed.  If  you  will  find  the  secret 
of  Luther's  power  over  men,  look  to  his  struggles  with  his 
own  heart  in  the  monastery  at  Erfurt.  When  a  man  is 
thus  doubly  fitted  for  his  work,  he  goes  to  his  divinely 
ordained  task  with  true  kingly  power.  Men  know  him 
for  what  he  is  and  accept  him  as  their  leader. 

Jesus  Christ  was  destined  to  be  the  leader  not  of  a  part 
of  the  race,  but  of  mankind ;  not  in  a  single  sphere,  but 


186  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

in  the  sphere  of  universal  manhood.  The  first  Adam 
was  the  head  of  the  race  only  because  he  stood  first  in 
the  line.  His  relation  was  physical  rather  than  spiritual. 
The  second  Adam  was  the  Head  in  all  that  raises  man 
above  the  animal,  at  once  leader  and  redeemer.  He  pos- 
sessed both  the  qualifications  of  which  I  have  spoken.  He 
was  a  born  king.  All  those  qualities  which  enable  a  man 
to  hold  sway  over  his  fellows  were  his  from  the  start. 
The  world  has  never  seen  such  a  large-brained,  clear-sight- 
ed, many-sided  man,  with  strength  of  will  and  breadth  of 
sympathies  like  his.  We  catch  a  glimpse  of  this  won- 
derful natural  endowment  in  the  words  and  acts  of  the 
twelve-year-old  boy  in  the  temple.  Of  him  might  be 
used,  in  a  far  higher  sense  than  the  poet  meant  them,  the 
words  Shakespeare  puts  into  Antony's  mouth  as  descrip- 
tive of  Brutus  : 

' '  His  life  was  gentle  ;  and  the  elements 
So  mixed  in  him,  that  Nature  might  stand  up 
And  say  to  all  the  world,  '  This  was  a  man ! '  " 

But  Christ  did  not  only  possess  this  natural  endowment,- 
he  built  upon  this  foundation  the  noble  edifice  of  his 
character  and  work.  The  thirty  years  which  preceded  his 
ministry  are  passed  lightly  over  in  the  Gospels ;  but  there 
is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  they  were  less  decisive  in 
his  case  than  in  that  of  other  men.  They  were  the  years 
when  his  character  was  formed,  when  he  made  the  choice 
of  God's  kingdom  as  the  chief  end  of  all  his  living,  when 
he  strengthened  his  resolves  by  habits  slowly  and  pain- 
fully established.  The  fact  that  he  never  sinned  does  not 
alter  the  other  fact,  that  he  became  what  he  was  through 
discipline,  self-denial,  submission  to  God's  will.  When 
Satan  tempted  him,  he  found  in  him  not  only  the  God 
but  the  self-controlled,  disciplined  man,  against  the  rock 
of  whose  thoroughly  formed   character  his   temptations 


RELATION  OF  CHRIST  TO  GOD  AND  THE  CREATION     187 

were  shattered  like  the  winter  surges  when  they  beat 
against  the  crags  on  our  Maine  coast.  When,  therefore, 
the  Saviour  entered  upon  his  ministry  all  recognized  him 
as  a  leader,  and  the  good  and  true  flocked  about  him, 
while  the  evil  and  faithless  fought  against  him  with  an 
almost  demoniacal  rage.  Israel  was  looking  for  a  leader, 
looking  for  the  Christ,  and  the  word  on  every  lip  was,  "Is 
not  this  he  ?  is  not  this  the  Christ  ?  " 

But  there  was  still  another  stage  through  which  the  Sa- 
viour was  to  pass  before  he  became  in  truth  the  Head  of 
Mankind,  the  second  Adam.  His  work  of  redemption  on 
earth  completed  his  qualification  for  his  high  office  as  the 
King  of  men.  I  shall  not  go  far  into  this  subject,  for  we 
shall  go  over  the  same  ground  when  we  come  to  the  con- 
sideration of  Christ's  work.  Here  but  a  few  words.  The 
years  of  his  ministry  brought  him  into  contact  with  the 
men  he  came  to  save.  He  learned  all  the  misery  of  man- 
kind. He  took  human  suffering  and  sin  upon  his  heart. 
That  strange  power  men  have  to  enter  into  each  other's 
experiences  enabled  him  to  enter  into  the  understanding 
of  sin  as  no  other  man  ever  did — or  could.  Then  he, 
too,  suffered.  The  wrath  of  men  wreaked  itself  upon  his 
innocent  head.  He  was  subject  to  contumely,  to  reproach, 
to  persecution.  Finally,  he  was  slain,  slain  by  those  whom 
he  loved  and  had  come  to  save,  by  a  mockery  of  justice. 
Death,  that  awful  consequence  of  sin,  in  which  God's 
wrath  against  sin  is  expressed  in  all  its  rigor,  fell  on  him, 
though  sinless,  because  he  was  the  sinner's  Saviour.  I 
shall  not  speak  here  of  his  atonement.  I  am  concerned 
only  to  show  how  Christ  was  thus  fitted  for  his  kingly 
office,  how  he  became  the  Head  and  Leader  of  the  race, 
the  Second  Adam.  The  captain  of  our  salvation  was 
made  perfect  by  suffering.  It  was  thus  he  became  the 
Captain,  the  Leader  and  King,  that  he  is.  No  kingship 
was  ever  won  by  fairer  and  completer  effort.  He  is  our 
Lord  to-day  because  he  went  through  all  the  toilsome  way 


188  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

of  liis  humiliation  and  suffering  that  he  might  gain  the 
crown.  So  is  he  our  Redeemer  and  our  King — Redeemer 
because  King,  and  King  because  Redeemer. 

In  conclusion,  let  me  say  a  word  touching  a  current  con- 
troversy. The  question  is  earnestly  discussed  in  our  times 
whether  theology  as  a  system  is  Christocentric  or  Theo- 
centric,  whether  it  centers  in  Christ  or  in  God.  Is  the 
governing  principle  by  which  its  orderly  system  is  devel- 
oped derived  from  the  doctrine  of  God  or  the  doctrine  of 
Christ  ?  1  do  not  attempt  to  decide  the  question.  But  I 
wish  to  call  attention  to  the  results  of  our  discussion  in  the 
present  chapter.  Does  not  Christ  stand  in  such  a  relation 
to  the  great  facts  with  which  theology  has  to  do  that  he 
throws  upon  them  that  central  light  by  which  alone  they 
can  be  understood  ?  Must  we  not,  if  we  will  know  God, 
the  universe,  and  man,  first  know  something  of  Clirist  ? 
The  God  of  nature  we  know  by  the  natural  revelation. 
But  the  God  of  grace,  how  can  we  know  Him  except  as 
we  see  him  in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ  ?  And  how  can 
we  know  the  world  and  man,  except  as  we  view  them 
in  their  relation  to  him  who  is  at  once  Creator  and  Re- 
deemer ? 


XL 

THE  TRINITY 

St.  Attgijstin  begins  one  of  the  books  in  his  treatise  on 
the  Trinity  with  the  following  words :  "  I  pray  to  onr 
Lord  God  Himself,  of  whom  we  ought  always  to  think, 
and  of  whom  we  are  not  able  to  think  worthily,  in  praise 
of  whom  blessing  is  at  all  times  to  be  rendered,  and  whom 
no  speech  is  sufficient  to  declare,  that  He  will  grant  me 
both  help  for  understanding  and  explaining  that  which  I 
design,  and  pardon  if  in  anything  I  offend  "  (De  Trin., 
V.  i.  1).  We  may  well  take  the  prayer  as  our  own  as  we 
enter  upon  our  present  discussion.  The  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity  is  in  some  respects  the  most  sacred  in  the  Chris- 
tian system.  It  carries  us  into  the  inmost  secrets  of  the 
Deity.  Into  this  sanctuary  of  the  Christian  faith  we  do 
not  enter  by  the  way  of  worldly  knowledge,  but  by  him 
who  is  the  Way,  the  Truth,  and  the  Life.  We  know  the 
Trinity  through  the  Christ,  and  the  doctrine  of  the  Trin- 
ity is  a  corollary  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Christ. 

I.  We  begin  by  a  brief  examination  of  the  scriptural 
teachings  on  the  subject ;  and  first  we  look  at  the  Old 
Testament.  We  often  hear  it  said,  that  the  doctrine  of 
the  Trinity  belongs  exclusively  to  the  New  Testament. 
But  this  is  not  the  fact.  It  is  true  that,  like  all  the 
distinctive  truths  of  the  Gospel,  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity  is  found  in  its  developed  form  only  in  the  later 
and  crowning  dispensation  of  the  redemptive  revelation. 
These  truths,  however,  all  have  their  roots  in  the  revela- 
tion of  the  Old  Testament,  and  that  of  the  Trinity  is  no 
exception.     The   essential  elements   of  the  doctrine   are 


190  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

two,  the  divine  unity  and  the  divine  trinality.  Both  of 
these  elements  must  be  maintained,  if  the  truth  is  to  be 
held  in  its  completeness.  In  the  Old  Testament  the  unity 
is  emphasized,  and  we  can  discover  good  reasons  why  this 
should  be  the  case.  In  the  first  place,  the  trinality  of  God 
could  not  be  understood  in  its  relation  to  the  unity  until 
the  incarnation  had  thrown  its  light  upon  it.  And  then 
— what  was  perhaps  an  even  more  cogent  reason — the  first 
need  of  Israel,  the  people  chosen  to  be  God's  special  in- 
strument in  His  redemptive  revelation,  was  to  be  deliv- 
ered from  the  idolatry  of  the  surrounding  heathenism.  In 
the  presence  of  polytheism  in  its  worst  and  most  seductive 
forms,  the  divine  unity  must  be  emphasized.  Jehovah 
revealed  Himself  as  the  one  God.  The  fundamental  com- 
mandment was,  "  Thou  shalt  have  no  other  gods  before 
me"  (Ex.  XX.  3).  The  Israelite  confessed  his  faith  then, 
as  he  does  to-day.  in  the  words,  "  Hear,  O  Israel ;  the 
Lord  our  God  is  one  God  "  (Deut.  vi.  4). 

But  strict  as  was  the  monotheism  of  the  Old  Testament, 
it  contains  in  it  the  elements  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trin- 
ity, which  in  the  light  of  the  higher  revelation  we  can 
clearly  discover.  Our  examination  of  the  doctrine  of 
Christ  has  shown  us  that,  in  the  theophanies  of  the  Old 
Testament  and  the  predictions  of  a  divine  Messiah,  there 
are  intimations  of  a  Being  who  is  at  once  God  and  yet  dis- 
tinguishable from  Jehovah.  The  facts  do  not  permit  us 
to  say  that  Christ  is  predicted  in  the  Old  Testament 
merely  as  a  human  King.  Moreover,  the  Old  Testament 
doctrine  of  the  Spirit  distinguishes  between  God  and  the 
mysterious  agency  through  which  He  works  in  nature  and 
man.  It  is  true  that  the  Spirit  is  regarded  by  the  saci-ed 
writers  for  the  most  part  as  the  impersonal  power  of  God. 
But  more  and  more,  as  revelation  advances,  there  is  a  ten- 
dency to  ascribe  personality  to  the  Spirit ;  and  whether  or 
not  the  personality  is  recognized,  the  Spirit  is  in  the  high- 
est sense  divine,  and  all  that  is  needed  to  make  the  per- 


THE   TRINITY  191 

sonality  appear  is  the  higher  truth  of  the  Spirit's  office 
which  Christ  was  to  reveah  I  am  not  asserting  that  the 
Israelites  themselves,  even  those  who  stood  on  the  moun- 
tain-tops of  inspiration,  recognized  a  Trinity.  All  I  as- 
sert is,  that  when  they  were  brought  to  the  higher  revela- 
tions of  the  Gospel,  they  found  enwrapped  in  their  old 
doctrine  of  God  all  the  elements  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity. 

The  New  Testament  discloses  the  truth  in  all  its  ful- 
ness. There  are  indeed  those  who  declare  that,  because 
we  find  only  a  few  passages  in  which  the  elements  of  the 
doctrine  are  brought  together  with  something  of  the  ex- 
actitude of  a  doctrinal  statement,  the  New  Testament  evi- 
dence for  this  great  fact  is  meagre  and  insufficient.  But 
these  few  passages  do  not  furnish  us  with  the  chief  evi- 
dence upon  which  Trinitarians  rely.  The  whole  theolog- 
ical basis  of  the  New  Testament  is  Trinitarian.  The  fol- 
lowing facts  appear  on  almost  every  page :  God  is  one ; 
the  Father  is  God,  yet  distinguishable  from  the  Son  and 
the  Spirit ;  the  Son  is  God,  both  in  his  pre-existent  and 
incarnate  states,  yet  distinguishable  from  the  Father  and 
the  Spirit ;  the  Holy  Ghost  is  God,  yet  distinguishable 
from  the  Father  and  the  Son.  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Spirit  are  all  described  as  personal.  We  find  these  facts 
not  only  expressed  in  the  direct  statements  of  the  sacred 
writers,  but  implied  in  all  their  teachings,  appearing  wher- 
ever we  can  perceive  the  drift  and  tendency  of  their  theo- 
logical thought.  The  redemptive  grace  of  God  is  ascribed 
to  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost  alike.  They  all  appear 
in  the  divine  activities  by  which  the  work  of  God's  king- 
dom is  carried  forward.  The  divine  attributes  are  freely 
attributed  to  all.  In  a  word,  the  threefold  cord  of  this 
great  doctrine  is  everywhere  inwoven  in  the  texture  of  the 
New  Testament. 

But  while  this  is  the  case,  I  am  far  from  undervaluing 
the  few  texts  which  bring  the  elements  of  the  doctrine 


192  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

together  with  something  of  the  exactitude  of  a  theological 
formula.  The  most  important  of  these  is  the  so  called 
"  baptismal  formula  :  "  "  Go  je  therefore  and  make  dis- 
ciples of  all  the  nations,  baptizing  them  into  the  name 
of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost " 
(Matt,  xxviii.  19).  In  order  to  appreciate  the  full  force 
of  these  words,  we  must  consider  by  whom  they  were 
uttered  and  under  what  circumstances,  as  well  as  the 
purpose  for  which  they  were  uttered.  They  were  our 
Saviour's  last  words  before  his  ascension,  the  "  great 
commission "  which  lie  gave  his  disciples,  and  which 
was  to  be  their  guide  during  all  the  ages  of  the  Christian 
church.  They  related  to  the  most  important  rite  of 
the  church.  They  were  words  which  our  Saviour  knew 
would  be  repeated  as  each  new  convert,  during  the  cen- 
turies to  come,  should  be  admitted  to  the  Christian 
brotherhood.  What  occasion  could  have  been  more  sol- 
emn and  significant?  Moreover,  we  must  remember 
what  the  terms  employed  meant  to  those  first  disciples. 
The  name  of  God  carried  with  it  to  the  Jewish  mind  the 
whole  meaning  of  the  divine  nature.  To  us  names  are 
ai-bitrar}!-  and  inexpressive.  We  call  our  children  John, 
Hannibal,  Anna,  Helen,  according  to  our  kindred,  our 
associations,  or  our  fancy  ;  and,  so  far  as  any  real  signifi- 
cance in  the  names  is  concerned,  we  might  as  well  invent 
new  names,  or  designate  persons  by  numbers,  as  they 
do  the  prisoners  in  the  galleys.  But  it  was  not  so  with 
the  Hebrew.  All  his  names  were  significant,  and  most 
of  all  the  names  of  God.  The  divine  names  were  rev- 
elations. At  first  God  was  called  El  Shaddai,  the  Al- 
might}'  God  (Gen.  xvii.  1).  He  was  the  powerful  Being 
who  protected  His  people  and  brought  judgment  to  their 
enemies.  Then  He  revealed  Himself  under  the  covenant 
name  Jahveh  or  Jehovah  (Ex.  vi.  3),  the  great  I  Am,  the 
free,  independent  God  of  the  redemptive  revelation,  unde- 
termined in  His  action  by  anything  outside  of  Himself. 


THE   TRINITY  193 

The  Saviour  concentrates  his  revelation  of  God  as  the 
God  of  grace  in  a  new  name.  He  is  the  Father.  This  is 
tlie  name  which  points  to  the  establishment  of  the  New 
Covenant,  as  that  of  Jehovah  did  to  the  Old.  His  own 
name,  too,  is  significant  of  his  natm'e  and  relation  to  God, 
that  name  in  which  he  directs  his  disciples  to  pray  (John 
xiv.  13).  But  in  his  last  command,  as  he  gives  directions 
respecting  the  sacred  rite  of  admission  to  the  Christian 
church,  he  gives  the  name  which  sums  up  in  its  complete- 
ness the  revelation  of  the  Gospel,  the  Triune  Name.  He 
does  not  saj,  "  Baptize  into  the  names  of  the  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Ghost,"  but  "  into  the  namey  It  is  One  in 
Three,  the  God  who  is  at  once  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Spirit.  Every  time  that  a  child  is  sprinkled  with  the  em- 
blematic water  and  is  recognized  as  a  member  of  God's 
kingdom  dejure^  and  a  member  of  the  visible  church  de 
facto,  and  every  time  that  a  convert  from  heathenism  or 
the  world  is  in  the  same  way  clothed  with  the  highest 
privileges  of  the  Christian  name,  the  sacred  doctrine  of 
the  Trinity  is  reafiirmed. 

To  this  most  important  text  may  be  added  the  apostolic 
benediction,  "  The  grace  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and 
the  love  of  God,  and  the  communion  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
be  with  you  all "  (2  Cor.  xiii.  14) ;  and  the  striking  lan- 
guage respecting  the  charisms  of  the  primitive  church, 
"Now  there  are  diversities  of  gifts,  but  the  same  Spirit. 
And  there  are  diversities  of  ministrations,  and  the  same 
Lord.  And  there  are  diversities  of  workings,  but  the 
same  God,  who  worketh  all  things  in  all "  (1  Cor.  xii.  4- 
6).     (Compare  with  these  Eph.  iv.  4-6  ;  Rom.  xi.  36.) 

II,  But  I  pass  to  consider  the  formulation  of  the  doc- 
trine in  the  Christian  church.  From  the  first  it  was  held 
simply  and  unreflectingly  by  all  Christians.  It  was  onl}^ 
as  controversy  arose  that  the  church  found  it  needful 
to  furnish  a  philosophical  statement  of  the  great  truth. 
The  development  of  thought  upon  the  subject  was  direct- 
13 


194  PEESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

]y  connected  with  the  controversies  respecting  the  person 
of  Christ.  Indeed,  the  discussion  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity  formed  a  part  of  the  Christological  discussion. 
If  Christ  was  divine,  God  in  the  fullest  and  highest 
sense,  both  before  and  after  the  incarnation,  then  the 
Deity  is  not  a  bare  undistinguished  unity.  The  question 
respecting  the  divinity  of  the  Holy  Spirit  was  one  of 
njinor  importance,  to  be  settled  according  to  the  issue  of 
the  main  controversy.  We  have  already  touched  upon 
the  Christological  disputes,  but  it  will  be  needful  briefly 
to  refer  to  them  again,  so  far  as  relates  to  the  subject  be- 
fore us.  First,  however,  let  it  be  noted  that  the  inade- 
quate or  heretical  theories  arose  from  laying  undue  em- 
phasis upon  one  or  the  other  of  the  two  essential  factors 
of  the  scriptural  doctrine,  the  unity  and  the  trinality  of 
God.  Ehionism  put  the  entire  stress  upon  the  unity, 
making  God  one  in  the  sense  of  the  Old  Testament,  and 
reducing  Christ  to  the  level  of  mere  manhood,  while  there 
was  no  talk  of  a  Trinity  even  in  the  lowest  sense.  Then 
came  Sabellianism  in  the  third  century,  also  emphasizing 
the  divine  unity,  yet  teaching  at  the  same  time  the  Deity 
of  Christ,  and,  while  not  altogether  excluding  the  trinal- 
ity, still  giving  it  a  quite  subordinate  place.  According 
to  this  view  the  names  Father,  Son,  and  Spirit  do  not 
designate  eternal  distinctions  in  the  Godhead,  but  phases 
or  aspects  under  which  God  has  revealed  Himself  in  time. 
In  creation  and  the  Old  Dispensation  God  revealed  Him- 
self as  the  Father  ;  in  the  Incarnation  and  the  Redemptive 
work  of  Christ  as  the  Logos  or  Son  ;  in  the  Christian  Dis- 
pensation as  the  Holy  Spirit.  But  God  in  Himself  is 
eternally  one,  and  when  redemption  is  completed  these 
temporary  modes  of  manifestation  will  have  served  their 
purpose  and  God  will  return  into  the  unity  of  the  Monas. 
Arianism^  in  the  fourth  century,  which  we  have  already 
considered  in  its  relation  to  the  person  of  the  Redeemei', 
also  endeavored,  while  laying  the  chief  emphasis  upon  the 


THE   TRINITY  195 

divine  unity,  to  retain  the  triiiality,  and  so  made  the  Trin- 
ity an  association  between  God  and  two  exalted  yet  created 
beings,  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  neither  of  whom 
was  divine  in  the  true  sense  of  the  term.  Semi-Arianism 
taught  the  eternity  of  the  Son  and  the  Spirit,  but  would 
admit  only  a  likeness  in  essence  to  God,  not  their  true 
Deity.  Finally,  Tritheism  asserted  the  trinality  with 
such  emphasis  as  to  destroy  the  unity.  Father,  Son,  and 
Holy  Spirit  are  all  divine  in  the  highest  sense ;  but  they 
are  three  Gods,  not  one,  so  that  the  line  which  separates 
Christianity  from  polytheism  is  passed. 

Between  the  rocks  and  shoals  of  these  erroneous  views 
the  Christian  church,  holding  fast  to  the  simple  teachings 
of  the  New  Testament,  steered  its  way.  The  doctrine, 
which  was  formulated  in  the  creeds  of  Nicsea  and  Con- 
stantinople, has  been  accepted  by  the  great  inajority  of 
Christians  in  all  ages,  not  because  it  was  proclaimed  by 
universal  councils,  but  because  it  has  commended  itself  to 
the  Christian  consciousness  of  the  church  as  scriptural 
and  true.  The  Orthodox  doctrine,  as  we  may  truly  call 
it — not  as  stigmatizing  opposing  views,  but  as  affirming 
the  common  faith  of  Christendom — lays  equal  emphasis 
upon  the  unity  and  the  trinality  of  God.  All  that  is 
essential  to  it  may  be  stated  in  the  following  propositions : 

1.  God  is  One  ; 

2.  The  Father  is  God  ; 

3.  The  Son  is  God  ; 

4.  The  Holy  Spirit  is  God  ; 

5.  Father,  Son,  and  Spirit  are  eternally  distinct. 
Whoever  can  accept  these  propositions  has  all  that  is 

vital  in  the  Orthodox  faith. 

But  let  us  state  the  great  truth  in  the  technical  terms  of 
theology.  God  in  His  essence  or  nature  is  indivisibly 
One.  To  this  one  nature  belong  the  divine  attributes,  in- 
finity, eternity,  immensity,  immutability,  omnipotence, 
omniscience,  wisdom,  holiness,  righteousness,  truth,  and 


196  PRESENT  DAY    THEOLOGY 

love.  There  are  not  three  Eternals,  but  onliy^  one  Eternal. 
This  one  God  is  a  personal  Spirit.  Herein  Christianity 
agrees  wholly  with  the  theology  of  the  Old  Testament, 
and  is  as  truly  and  profoundly  monotheistic.  But  the 
higher  revelation  goes  further  and  discloses  in  the  unity 
of  the  Godhead  three  eternal  distinctions,  which  are 
called,  in  the  technical  language  of  theolog}^,  hypostases 
or  persons.  The  term  person  is  not  employed  here  as  we 
understand  it  in  the  ordinary  use  of  language.  Ever  since 
the  days  of  Augustin  it  has  been  taken  in  a  special  and 
unusual  sense.  A  person  in  the  common  use  of  the  term 
is  an  individual,  separate  from  other  individuals.  But 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit  are  not  persons  in  this  sense. 
Three  human  individuals  may  be  said,  as  members  of  the 
same  class,  to  possess  a  common  nature  ;  they  are  all  men. 
But  the  three  divine  persons  possess  the  same  nature,  the 
one  identical  essence.  They  do  not  divide  it,  they  do  not 
share  it;  it  is  their  common  nature  in  the  sense  that  each 
possesses  the  whole  in  its  indivisible  unity.  Moreover, 
thei'e  is  a  true  sense  in  which  God  in  His  unity  is  a  person. 
This  is  recognized  alike  in  the  common  speech  of  men 
and  in  the  language  of  the  Christian  consciousness.  Ac- 
cordingly, we  must  understand  the  trijyersonality  as  exist- 
ing consistently  with  the  unij>ersonality  of  God.  We  de- 
fine a  person  as  a  self-conscious,  self-determining  being,  a 
subject,  one  who  can  use  the  pronoun  I  to  describe  itself. 
Kow,  the  three  persons  of  the  Trinity  are  distinguislied 
as  in  some  sense  distinct,  self-conscious,  and  self-determin- 
ing subjects.  They  use  the  pronouns  I  and  Thou.  Christ 
speaks  of  the  "  glory  which  I  had  with  Thee  before  the 
world  was "  (John  xvii.  5).  The  names  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Spirit  impl}^  some  such  personal  distinctions. 
Kevertheless,  we  cannot  suppose  that  these  personalities, 
these  Egos  or  Selves,  are  bounded  off  and  separated  from 
each  other,  as  is  the  case  with  men.  Rather  we  are  led 
to  suppose  that  in  the  one  self-consciousness  of  the  infinite 


THE   TRINITY  197 

God  there  are  three  distinct  centers  of  self-consciousness, 
three  distinct  Egos  which  spring  from  and  are  merged  in 
the  one  divine  Ego.  There  is  not  entire  agreement  among 
Orthodox  theologians  upon  this  point,  and  with  good  rea- 
son. Who  can  find  out  the  Almighty  unto  perfection  ? 
Is  it  strange  if  the  personality  of  an  infinite  Being  is 
something  far  more  complex  and  far  higher  than  person- 
ality in  finite  men  ?  The  closeness  of  the  relation  between 
the  three  persons  is  indicated  in  the  teaching  of  Orthodox 
theology,  that  in  each  act  of  any  one  of  the  persons  the 
other  two  participate.  The  Father  does  nothing  alone, 
but  in  conjunction  with  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Thus  when  the  Son  became  incarnate,  the  whole  Godhead 
participated  in  the  act. 

According  to  the  Orthodox  doctrine  of  the  Trinitj^,  the 
terms  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit  designate  the  re- 
spective characteristics  and  the  reciprocal  relations  of  the 
three  persons  or  hypostases — that  is,  they  are  not  merely 
descriptive  of  their  relations  to  the  world  and  men,  but 
truly  denominate  the  internal  relations  of  the  Trinity. 
The  Father  stands  in  such  relations  to  the  Son  as  render 
these  names  fitting,  and  the  relation  of  the  third  Person 
to  both  is  such  as  is  appropriately  described  by  the  title 
Spirit.  These  names  also  point  to  the  fixed  order  or  gra- 
dation which  exists  between  the  three  persons.  The  three 
hypostases  are  equal  in  that  each  possesses  the  common  es- 
sence ;  each  is  God  in  the  highest  and  truest  sense.  But 
in  their  mutual  relations  there  is  a  priority.  The  Father 
is  the  Head,  the  Source,  so  to  speak,  of  the  Trinity.  He 
is  in  order — not,  indeed,  of  time,  but  rather  of  mode  of 
subsistence — before  the  Son.  The  Son  stands  in  order 
after  the  Father.  There  is  a  sense  in  which  he  is  depend- 
ent on  the  Father.  The  Holy  Spirit  comes  after  both 
and  is  dependent  upon  both.  There  is,  in  a  word,  such  a 
relation  that  we  properly  use  the  designations,  first,  sec- 
ond, and  third  persons  of  the  Trinity,  and  it  would  not  be 


198  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

proper  to  transpose  this  order.  The  relation  of  which  I 
am  speaking  is  commonly  designated  by  theologians  the 
"  suboi'dination  "  of  the  Son  to  the  Father,  and  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  to  the  Father  and  the  Son.  It  is  to  be  dis- 
tinguished from  that  erroneous  doctrine  of  subordination, 
of  which  Semi-Ariauism  is  the  best  and  highest  example. 
The  true  subordination  relates  to  the  persons,  but  not  to 
the  essence.  The  false  subordination  extends  to  the  es- 
sence itself.  According  to  the  Semi-Arians,  the  Son, 
though  an  eternal  Being,  is  not  God  in  the  highest  sense. 
He  derives  his  existence  from  the  Father.  He  is  on  the 
lower  side  of  the  line  which  sepai-ates  the  infinite  from 
the  finite.  The  true  subordination  is  wholly  a  matter  of 
the  hypostases  or  persons.  Father,  Son,  and  H0I3'  Spirit, 
ai-e  each  God  in  the  highest  sense  ;  each  is  Infinite  in  the 
highest  and  fullest  sense.  But  between  these  distinctions 
of  the  Infinite  Being  there  exists  this  relation  of  order, 
this  subordination.  It  is  in  view  of  this  fact,  as  Calvin 
says,  that  the  Father  is  called  by  way  of  eminence,  God. 
His  words  are  : 

"  Since-  the  peculiar  properties  of  the  Persons  produce 
a  certain  order,  so  that  the  original  cause  is  in  the  Father, 
whenever  the  Father  and  Son  or  Spirit  are  mentioned  to- 
gether, the  name  of  God  is  peculiarly  ascribed  to  the 
Father ;  by  this  method  the  unity  of  the  essence  is  pre- 
served, and  the  order  is  retained  ;  which,  however,  dero- 
gates nothing  from  the  Deity  of  the  Son  and  Spirit "  (In- 
stitutes, "  Trans,  of  Presb.  Board,"  vol.  i.,  p.  136). 

All  the  great  theologians  of  the  Christian  church,  since 
the  days  of  the  Council  of  Nice,  have  accepted  this  doc- 
trine of  subordination.  (It  has  been  asserted  that 
Augustin  is  an  exception,  but  this  is  denied  by  Dr.  Shedd. 
See  "  The  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers,"  vol.  iii.,  p.  4). 
It  is  important  that  it  should  be  understood,  if  we  are  to 
do  justice  to  the  teachings  of  the  Scripture  and  the  utter- 


THE   TRINITY  199 

ances  of  the  Christian  consciousness.  Orthodoxy  requires 
that  we  should  recognize  the  one  divine  nature  as  belong- 
ing in  the  fullest  and  highest  sense  to  Father,  Son,  and 
Holy  Ghost,  but  it  equally  requires  that  we  should  rec- 
ognize the  relation  of  priority  and  subordination  (in  the 
sense  which  has  been  explained)  existing  between  the 
three  persons. 

III.  I  turn  with  a  sense  of  relief  from  this  branch  of 
our  subject.  The  controversies  of  the  church  have  been 
largely  concerned  with  the  philosophy  of  theology.  This 
has  been  the  case  especially  with  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity.  The  question  at  stake  has  been  of  immense  im- 
portance. The  Greek  letter  «c?^(2,  which  distinguished  the 
homoiousion  from  the  Jiomoousion,  the  doctrine  of  the 
likeness  of  nature  in  Father  and  Son  from  that  of  the 
sameness  of  their  nature,  marked  a  gap,  the  tremendous 
width  and  depth  of  which  only  those  can  realize  who  are 
familiar  with  the  history  of  the  church,  and  who  know  how 
the  lower  views  of  Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit  have  al- 
ways led  to  an  ultimate  abandonment  of  the  distinctive 
doctrines  of  the  Christian  system.  Nevertheless,  the  con- 
troversy has  turned  on  the  form  rather  than  the  matter  of 
the  great  Christian  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  It  has  been 
looked  at  rather  as  a  conception  of  the  intellect,  an  ab- 
straction, rather  than  the  living  fact  that  it  is.  So  it  has 
often  happened  that  Christians,  who  have  had  erroneous 
doctrinal  views  upon  the  subject,  have  yet  stood  in  such 
close  personal  communion  with  the  Triune  God,  that 
their  faith  has  put  to  shame  the  accurate  but  lifeless  ortho- 
doxy of  their  fellow-Christians.  I  ask  you,  then,  to  turn 
for  a  moment  from  the  philosophical  form  of  the  doctrine 
and  consider  its  contents. 

What  are  the  facts  which  the  Christian  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity  brings  to  our  knowledge  ?  It  reveals  to  us  not  a 
God  who  is  a  bare  unity,  dwelling  alone  through  the  ages 
of  eternity,  shut  up  in  the  contemplation  of  His  own  per- 


200  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

fections,  aud  emerging  from  Ilis  solitude  only  when  He 
creates  a  world,  llather  it  makes  known  to  us  a  God  in 
whom  there  is  an  eternal  fulness  of  life.  There  is  in  Ilim 
at  once  unity  and  plurality.  He  is  self-sufficient,  not  in 
the  sense  of  being  wrapt  up  in  solitary  self-contemplation, 
but  rather  in  the  sense  of  containing  in  Himself  all  the 
elements  of  a  blessed  and  holy  fellowship.  The  New 
Testament  gives  its  crowning  revelation  of  God  in  the 
declaration,  "God  is  Love"  (1  John  iv.  8,  16).  In  what 
sense  is  this  true  ?  only  in  His  relations  to  His  creatures  ? 
or  is  He  love  in  His  eternal  essence  ?  Christian  theology 
lias  always  replied  that  He  is  eternally  and  essentially 
love.  But  what  is  love  to  God  ?  If  we  think  of  Him 
only  in  His  unity,  it  is  hard  to  avoid  the  conception  of  a 
self-love  which  is  not  far  removed,  if  at  all,  from  that 
selfishness  which  is  the  principle  of  sin.  It  is  not  to  be 
denied  that  God  has  often  been  so  represented,  that  the 
impression  has  been  created  that  He  is  the  supremely  self- 
ish Being — so  that  unconsciously  men  have  allowed  the 
conceptions  of  God  and  the  Devil  to  change  places  in 
their  minds.  But  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  reveals  the 
fact  that  God  is  Love  in  the  truest  sense.  In  the  eternal 
existence  of  God  there  is  that  plurality  w-hich  alone 
renders  love  possible.  For  love  implies  personal  relations 
of  some  sort.  It  is  a  self-communication,  a  self-bestowal. 
There  must  be  fellowship,  something  that  answers  to 
society  among  us.  Doubtless  the  relation  of  the  blessed 
Three  is  far  closer  than  any  relation  between  man  and 
man.  I  have  no  wish  to  teach  the  Tritheistic  doctrine  of 
a  "  social  Trinity."  But  allowing  for  the  coexistence  of 
tripersonality  with  unipersonality  in  God,  still  there  is 
that  reciprocal  communion,  that  relation  of  self  to  self, 
which  love  requires  for  its  existence.  God  is  Love.  That 
is  the  key  which  unlocks  the  mystery  of  the  Trinity. 

But  farther — the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  throws  light 
upon  this  life  of  love  in  the  Deity.     There  is  Fatherhood 


THE   TKINITY  201 

and  Sonsliip  there.  I  have  touched  upon  this  subject  in 
the  last  chapter ;  but  it  will  do  no  harm  to  repeat.  Tlie 
relation  of  parent  and  child  has  its  archetype  in  the  God- 
head. Natural  theology  teaches  us  to  look  at  the  Deity  as 
exalted  in  majesty  far  above  mankind,  as  the  great  Ruler 
whose  will  is  law,  and  whose  law  is  fate.  Christianity 
brings  God  near  to  us  in  its  teaching  of  the  eternal  Father 
and  the  eternal  Son.  Its  revelation  to  us  of  the  precious 
truth  that  God  is  our  Father  rests  back  upon  His  eternal 
Fatherhood.  And  then  there  is  Sonship  in  the  Godhead. 
There  is  that  relation,  at  once  of  dependence  and  co-opera- 
tion, which  belongs  to  the  son  who  is  in  the  closest  inti- 
macy with  his  father.  We  get  a  glimpse  into  the  eternal 
fact  through  the  revelation  which  has  been  made  in  time. 
The  Son  is  the  recipient  of  the  divine  plan ;  he  is  the 
Logos,  the  Divine  Reason,  in  whom  the  ideas  of  God  are 
mirrored.  As  the  Son  he  is  the  Creator ;  the  Father 
makes  the  world  through  him.  In  the  person  of  the 
Christ  he  comes  to  us  as  the  Revealer  and  the  Saviour. 
Only  the  Son  can  reveal  the  Father,  for  he  alone  know- 
eth  the  Father.  Only  the  Son  can  redeem  the  fallen  race, 
for  he  alone  can  bring  the  Father's  love  and  redeeming 
grace  to  us.  The  Holy  Spii'it  completes  the  Trinity.  He 
is  the  personal  Life  and  Energy  of  God.  He  is  the  meet- 
ing-point of  the  Fatherhood  and  Sonship,  dependent  upon 
both,  yet  freely  co-operative  with  both.  He  completes 
the  circle  of  love  and  fellowship  and  knowledge ;  in  him 
the  full  tide  of  the  divine  life  is  carried  back  to  its  source. 
The  most  complete  analogy  of  the  relation  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  to  the  Deity  is  found  in  the  relation  of  the  human 
spirit  to  the  man  himself.  "  For  who  among  men,"  says 
Paul,  "  knoweth  the  things  of  a  man,  save  the  spirit  of 
the  man,  which  is  in  him  ?  even  so  the  things  of  God 
none  knoweth,  save  the  Spirit  of  God  "  (1  Cor.  ii.  11). 
Our  power  of  self-knowledge,  that  inner  sense  by  which 
we  turn  back  the   light  of   our  consciousness  upon  the 


202  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

powers  and  operations  of  the  soul,  by  which  we  know 
ourselves  at  once  as  subject  and  object,  as  personality  and 
thought,  gives  us  an  imperfect  yet  true  idea  of  the  divine 
Spirit.  But  the  office  of  the  Spii-it  can  be  best  under- 
stood through  His  workings  in  the  world.  AVhenever 
God  comes  into  direct  contact  with  the  creature,  it  is 
through  the  Spirit.  The  presence  of  the  divine  energy 
and  life  in  the  new-created  universe  is  described  as  the 
"  brooding  of  the  Spirit  upon  the  face  of  the  waters  " 
(Gen.  i.  2).  The  omnipresence  of  God  in  nature  is 
through  the  Spirit.  He  is  the  source  of  physical  energy, 
and  of  the  life  of  vegetable  and  animal.  He  is  the  life 
of  the  human  spirit.  Through  Him  God  dwells  in  every 
soul.  It  is  the  workings  of  the  Spirit  which  the  Pantheist 
perceives  when  he  discovers  his  universal,  infinite  Sub- 
stance under  the  shifting  forms  of  the  phenomenal  world. 
The  unknown  Power  of  the  Agnostic  is  the  omnipresent 
Spirit.  In  the  work  of  redemption  the  Spirit  brings  to 
men  the  knowledge  and  power  of  God.  He  dwells  in 
prophets  and  holy  men  to  inspire  them  for  the  parts  they 
have  to  play  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  lie  brings  to  men 
the  redemptive  grace  of  the  Father  and  the  exalted 
Christ.  It  is  Ilis  work  to  touch  the  sinner's  heart,  to  ef- 
fect the  new  birth,  to  dwell  in  the  Christian  as  the  Spirit 
of  holiness,  to  make  intercession  for  him  in  his  prayers 
to  God,  to  be  his  constant  Guide  and  inward  Monitor. 
He  is  the  present  and  uniting  power  of  God  in  the  Chris- 
tian church. 

Such  is  the  God  whom  we  worship,  the  God  of  infinite 
Love,  Three  in  One,  Father,  Son,  and  H0I3'  Ghost. 

lY.  It  remains  to  speak  of  the  reasonableness  of  the 
Christian  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  This  is  called  in  ques- 
tion by  all  the  opponents  of  the  Orthodox  faith,  and  too 
often  Trinitarians  themselves  so  far  justify  them  in  their 
position  as  to  assert  that  the  doctrine  cannot  be  defended 
upon  rational  grounds,  but  is  to  be  received  sinjply  upon 


THE   TEINITY  203 

the  authority  of  revelation.  Now,  there  is  undoubtedly 
an  element  of  incomprehensibility  or  mystery  in  this  doc- 
ti'ine.  But  this  is  due  to  the  fact  that  it  is  a  doctrine  of 
God,  not  that  it  is  the  doctrine  of  the  triunit}'  of  God. 
From  the  nature  of  the  case  the  Infinite  must  be  beyond 
our  comprehension.  We  can  only  know  Him  in  part, 
through  finite  analogies  and  forms.  It  is  enough  if  we 
have  some  true  knowledge  of  Him.  We  can  never  ex- 
pect to  grasp  in  our  little  thought  the  infinite  reality.  If 
our  doctrine  of  God  is  to  be  rejected  because  there  is  in  it 
an  element  of  mystery  or  incomprehensibility,  then  Or- 
thodox and  Unitarians  alike  might  as  well  surrender  at 
once  to  the  Agnostics.  But  while  admitting  the  mystery 
which  belongs  to  our  doctrine,  in  common  with  every  other 
attempt  to  describe  the  Infinite  Being,  we  deny  that  this 
mystery  attaches  exclusively,  or  even  particularly,  to  the 
conception  of  Him  as  Three  in  One.  ISTay,  rather,  al- 
though we  readily  confess  that  we  should  never  have  come 
to  the  knowledge  of  the  Triune  God  without  the  aid  of 
revelation,  we  affirm  that,  having  thus  obtained  this 
knowledge,  we  have  the  highest  grounds  in  reason  for 
maintaining  it. 

In  the  first  place,  there  is  no  a  priori  objection  to  the 
doctrine.  God  stands  alone.  He  is  not  a  member  of  a 
class,  with  the  other  members  of  which  we  can  compare 
Him.  We  can  know  Him  only  as  He  makes  Himself 
known,  and  there  is  no  more  reason  in  the  nature  of  things 
why  He  should  be  a  Unity  than  why  He  should  be  a  Trin- 
ity. Facts  must  decide  who  and  what  He  is.  It  is,  indeed, 
declared  that  God  cannot  be  at  the  same  time  One  and 
Three,  because  it  is  a  mathematical  impossibility.  The 
objection  has  been  urged  by  generations  of  grave  Unitari- 
ans, who,  perhaps,  have  really  thought  they  have  refuted 
Orthodoxy  in  this  cheap  and  easy  way.  But  it  is  difficult 
to  see  how  they  could  have  been  in  earnest.  A  mathe- 
matical absurdity  might  have  been  accepted  during  the 


204  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

Middle  Ages  alongside  of  the  doctrine  of  transubstantia- 
tion.  But  the  greatest  intellects  of  the  centuries  since  the 
Reformation  have  not  given  themselves  to  any  such  fool- 
ishness. The  slightest  examination  of  the  doctrine  is  suf- 
ficient to  show  that  God  is  not  held  to  be  One  in  the  same 
sense  in  which  lie  is  Three.  Moreover,  the  analogies  of 
finite  things  all  go  to  show  the  absurdity  of  the  objec- 
tion. Everywhere  in  nature  unity  coexists  with  pluralit}'. 
Science  has  not  yet  succeeded,  and  probably  never  will 
succeed,  in  getting  rid  of  the  duality  of  mass  and  energy 
which  exists  in  the  unity  of  matter.  Unity  in  plurality  is 
the  distinctive  mark  of  all  organic  life,  from  the  lowest 
vegetable  to  the  highest  animal.  The  unity  of  the  human 
soul  exists  only  in  conjunction  with  a  plurality  of  facul- 
ties. In  truth,  if  God  is  a  bare  unit,  He  is  the  only  one 
of  which  we  have  any  knowledge.  If  we  are  to  know 
God  at  all,  it  can  be  only  through  His  resemblances  to 
finite  things,  but  here  the  analogies  are  all  against  the 
Unitarian  view.  So  far  as  the  coexistence  of  unity  with 
plurality  in  the  Deity  is  concerned,  reason  certainly  favors 
the  Trinitarian  doctrine. 

Again,  the  Christian  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  shows  its 
reasonableness  when  viewed  in  relation  to  the  ethnic  re- 
ligions. Natural  theology,  under  the  perverting  influence 
of  human  sin,  has  resulted  in  false  faiths.  But  we  may 
learn  something  of  the  truth  from  the  verj^  distortions  to 
which  it  has  been  subjected.  We  cannot  suppose  that 
there  are  no  elements  of  reality  in  the  heathen  theologies. 
Kow  heathenism  has  vibrated  constantly  between  two  con- 
ceptions of  the  Deity.  The  one  is  polytheism.  The  God- 
head is  divided  into  a  multiplicity  of  gods,  yet  with  a 
vague  idea,  more  or  less  clearly  expressed,  of  an  underly- 
ing unity.  The  other  heathen  conception  of  God  is  the 
pantheistic.  The  Deity  has  been  confounded  with  the 
world.  Here  the  divine  unity  is  emphasized,  though  with 
a  recognition,  more  or  less  distinct,  of  a  plurality — none 


.  THE   TRINITY  205 

the  less  real  and  significant  because  it  is  a  plurality  of 
manifestation  rather  than  of  essence.  Now  there  is  an 
element  of  truth  in  each  of  these  views.  The  error,  like 
most  human  errors,  is  itself  a  distorted  truth.  The  Chris- 
tian doctrine  of  the  Trinity  gives  the  full  truth  after  which 
heathenism  has  been  blindly  groping,  the  Unity  in  Plural- 
ity, the  Triune  God.  (See  some  interesting  remarks  on 
this  point  in  Hodge's  "Popular  Lectures  on  Theological 
Themes,"  p.  129  seq.).  The  bare  monotheism  which  the 
Unitai'ian  maintains  has  no  place  in  the  ethnic  religions. 
It  is  to  be  found  only  in  the  Judaism  of  the  synagogue 
and  Mohammedanism,  both  of  which  are  perversions  of 
the  religion  of  the  Old  Testament  (Delitzsch,  "  Christ- 
liche  Apologetik,"  p.  263  seq.).  Nor  will  it  ever  meet 
the  spiritual  needs  of  men.  The  heart  of  humanity  cries 
out  after  the  living  God.  Christian  missions,  in  the  glo- 
rious work  of  rescuing  the  heathen  and  bringing  them 
into  the  kingdom  of  God,  must  come  to  benighted  souls 
with  the  Gospel  of  a  Triune  God  and  an  incarnate  Sav- 
iour. 

Once  more,  the  Christian  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  mani- 
fests its  reasonableness  upon  philosophical  grounds.  The 
great  question  of  speculative  philosophy  concerns  the  nat- 
ure of  the  Ground  and  Cause  of  all  things.  Is  it  matter 
or  is  it  Spirit  ?  is  it  impersonal  or  personal  ?  Material- 
ism, pantheism,  agnosticism,  deism,  theism,  are  the  differ- 
ent answers  which  the  philosophies  give  to  these  questions. 
Here,  too,  as  in  the  ethnic  religions,  we  may  find  in  each 
view  an  element  of  truth,  unless,  indeed,  we  except  the 
bare  materialism  which  reduces  everything  to  matter  and 
physical  energy,  turning  the  lowest  of  the  second  causes 
into  the  only  cause.  Now  what  philosophy  needs  is  a 
conception  of  the  First  Cause,  which  will  unite  all  these 
elements  of  truth — the  incomprehensibility  of  God  which 
agnosticism  teaches,  the  immanence  of  God  in  the  world 
which  pantheism  teaches,  the  transcendence  of  God  which 


206  PKESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

is  the  distinctive  characteristic  of  deism,  and  the  person- 
ality of  God  whicli  is  the  especial  glory  of  theism.  How- 
can  this  need  be  supplied  ?  The  only  answer  is,  By  the 
Christian  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  It  teaches,  first  of  all, 
with  the  profoundest  emphasis  and  deepest  insight,  the 
personality  of  God.  It  points  to  a  God  who  is  wholly  dis- 
tinct from  the  world,  capable  of  existing  wdth  no  world, 
its  Creator  and  Governor.  It  finds  an  especial  expression 
of  the  truth  of  the  divine  transcendence  in  its  doctrine 
of  the  Father.  But  it  declares  with  equal  emphasis  that 
God  is  immanent  in  nature  and  in  man.  The  doctrine  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  represents  the  truth  of  pantheism.  The 
infinite  Power  that  is  everywhere  present,  the  reality  of 
which  the  energy  and  life  of  nature  are  the  manifestation, 
is  the  Spirit  of  God.  He  is  the  substratum  of  the  human 
spirit,  the  light  of  our  intellectual  seeing,  the  source  of 
all  that  is  pure  and  holy  in  us.  Moreover,  by  the  incar- 
nation God  has  become  immanent  in  the  world  in  a  pecu- 
liar and  wondrous  way  for  our  redemption.  The  "Word 
has  become  flesh,  the  Father  has  come  to  us  through  the 
Son.  And  then,  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  leaves  un- 
touched the  mystery  and  incomprehensibility  of  the  Deity, 
which  agnosticism  asserts.  It  discloses  to  us  but  a  glimpse 
of  the  divine  nature,  leaving  us  on  the  shores  of  the  God- 
head, while  the  infinite  ocean  rolls  far  out  beyond  the  ut- 
most verge  of  our  horizon.  The  personality  of  God  can 
be  defended  with  full  philosophical  force  only  by  the  help 
of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  How  is  self-consciousness 
possible  in  God  ?  In  man  it  is  developed  by  an  experience 
in  which  the  world  and  our  fellow-men  are  indispensable 
factors.  I  cannot  know  that  I  am  I,  until  I  have  distin- 
guished myself  from  the  not-I,  from  the  universe  of  mat- 
ter and  spirit  about  me.  Self -consciousness  involves  three 
factors.  I  must  know  myself  as  subject,  I  must  know  my- 
self as  object,  I  must  know  that  subject  and  object  are  one. 
Now  this  cannot  be  without  the  aid  of  the  not-self,  the  ex- 


THE   TEINITY  207 

ternal  world.  No  world,  no  personality.  Now  how  is  self- 
consciousness  possible  in  God  ?  The  question  is  not  a  fool- 
ish one.  A  very  large  number  of  the  acutest  philosophers 
in  all  ages  have  not  only  asked  it  but  have  declared  that  it 
could  only  be  answered  in  one  way.  They  have  said  that 
God  must  have  a  world  in  order  to  attain  to  self-conscious- 
ness and  personality.  This  is  the  stronghold  of  pantheism, 
M'ith  its  eternal  world,  as  the  eternal  ground  of  self-con- 
sciousness in  God.  The  Christian  doctrine  of  the  Trinity 
is  the  one  foe  which  this  view  cannot  withstand.  If  God  is 
eternally  Three  in  One,  then  all  that  is  necessary  for  self- 
consciousness  and  personality  is  eternally  present  and  ac- 
tive in  God.  He  needs  no  world  through  which  to  come 
to  self-consciousness.  He  might  create  no  world,  and  still 
He  would  be  the  eternally  personal  God. 

Finally,  the  Christian  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  manifests 
its  reasonableness  upon  grounds  of  Christian  experience. 
This  is  the  strongest  and  only  certain  proof  of  the  doc- 
trine. The  Christian  in  his  life  of  faith  and  love  knows 
the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit.  Each  of  the  Three  has 
been  concerned  in  the  beginnings  and  the  progress  of  his 
religious  experience.  In  prayer,  in  service,  in  all  the  ex- 
ercises and  circumstances  of  his  Christian  life  he  has  had 
that  knowledge  of  the  Triune  God  which  is  eternal  life. 
The  great  fact  is  as  open  to  the  natural  man  as  to  the 
spiritual  man,  but  it  can  be  perceived  and  understood  only 
by  him  who  opens  his  whole  being  to  receive  the  things 
unseen  and  eternal.  It  has  been  truly  said,  "He  who 
has  not  felt  the  drawing  of  the  Father  to  the  Son,  and 
cannot  say,  '  Not  I  live,  but  Christ  liveth  in  me,'  and 
has  not  heard  within  the  unutterable  groanings  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  he  from  the  nature  of  the  case  will  neither 
know  nor  wish  to  know  the  Trinity  of  God  "  (Delitzsch, 
"  Apologetik,"  p.  275).  If  we  desire  to  know  the  truth  of 
this  doctrine,  let  us  try  the  method  of  experience.  The 
poet  Whittier,  in  his  verses  entitled  "  Trinitas,"  tells  how 


208  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

he  tried  to  solve  the  problem  of  the  Trinity  by  intellect- 
ual methods : 

"  At  morn  I  prayed,  '  I  fain  would  see 
How  Three  are  One,  and  One  is  Three '. 
Eead  the  dark  riddle  unto  me.'  " 

He  sought  the  answer  in  the  writings  of  the  theo- 
logians : 

"  That  night  with  painful  care  I  read, 
What  Hippo's  saint  and  Calvin  said, 
The  living  seeking  to  the  dead  ! 

"  In  vain  I  turned,  in  weary  quest, 

Old  pages,  where  (God  give  them  rest !) 

The  poor  creed-mongers  dreamed  and  guessed." 

It  was  in  vain.  But  he  had  been  out  that  day  in  the 
world.  He  had  felt  the  presence  of  God  in  nature  and 
seen  His  wisdom  and  His  love.  He  had  seen  a  pure 
woman  come  with  helping  words  and  deeds  to  a  fallen 
sister.  A  voice  in  his  own  soul  had  spoken  of  hope  and 
salvation  for  such  lost  sinners.  So  while  he  still  prayed 
came  the  answer : 

"  Then  something  whispered,  '  Dost  thou  pray 
For  what  thou  hast  ?    This  very  day 
The  holy  Three  have  crossed  thy  way.'  " 

"  '  The  equal  Father  in  rain  and  sun. 
His  Christ  in  the  good  to  evil  done. 
His  voice  in  thy  soul ; — and  the  Three  are  One.'  " 

And  so  it  must  be  to  us  all.  Reason  may  give  us 
strong  grounds,  apart  from  experience,  of  the  wonderful 
truth.  But  the  truth  itself  will  dawn  in  its  full-orbed 
beauty  only  upon  the  soul  that  sees  the  Triune  Lord  Him- 
self with  the  eye  of  faith.  To  such  an  one  the  Trinity  is 
no  more  a  hard  doctrine,  a  formula  which  is  to  be  ac- 
cepted because  it  belongs  to  the  creed  of  Orthodoxy ;  it 
is  the  living  fact  which  gives  life  and  the  world  their 
meaning. 


XII. 

THE  CHRISTIAN  CONCEPTION  OF  GOD. 

We  have  come  to  the  point  where  we  need  to  consider 
the  moral  character  of  God.  It  is  a  subject  of  untold  im- 
portance in  theology,  and  until  we  come  to  clear  views  re- 
specting it  we  cannot  take  a  single  step  forward.  Most, 
if  not  all,  the  errors  in  divinity  have  arisen  from  false  or 
confused  notions  of  the  divine  character.  We  cannot  rest 
satisfied  here  with  the  highest  conceptions  of  natural  the- 
ology. It  is  just  in  the  doctrine  of  God's  moral  attributes 
that  the  natural  revelation  is  most  defective.  In  a  world 
of  sin  we  need  a  higher  revelation.  It  is  not  merely  that 
there  are  facts  in  nature  and  human  society  which  we 
cannot  reconcile  with  God's  infinite  perfections ;  we  lack 
the  subjective  basis  for  the  perception  of  His  moral  and 
spiritual  character.  The  true  image  of  God  in  men  is 
blurred.  Our  Saviour  states  the  law  of  spiritual  knowl- 
edge, when  he  says,  "  Blessed  are  the  pure  in  heart,  for 
they  shall  see  God "  (Matt.  v.  8).  But  we  are  impure. 
Hence  the  need  of  the  redemptive  revelation.  And  we 
have  now  to  ask.  What  is  the  character  of  the  God  whom 
this  redemptive  revelation  makes  known  to  us  ?  Espe- 
cially we  need  to  know  how  He  has  been  revealed  to  us  in 
the  person  and  teachings  of  Jesus  Christ. 

"  And  one  cried  to  another  and  said,  Holy,  holy,  holy  is 
the  Lord  of  Hosts"  (Is.  vi.  3).  "He  that  loveth  not, 
knoweth  not  God  ;  for  God  is  love  "  (1  John  iv.  8).  These 
two  passages  express  what  is  distinctive  in  the  Christian 
conception  of  God.  He  is  holy  and  He  is  love.  Or,  more 
14 


210  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

briefly,  we  may  say,  He  is  holy  love  (Luthardt,  "  Kom- 
pendium  der  Dog^mtik,"  7te  Aufl,,  p.  92  seq.).  This  is 
the  truth  which  I  wish  to  explain  and  apply  in  the  present 
chapter. 

I.  Holiness  and  love  are  not  different  attributes  of 
God,  but  the  same  attributes  seen  under  different  aspects. 
As  Professor  Henry  B.  Smith  says,  "  The  divine  love  is 
taken  most  truly  as  equivalent  to  the  divine  holiness" 
("  System  of  Christian  Theology,"  p.  37).  Holiness  may 
be  called  \X\q  formal  aspect  of  God's  character.  It  brings 
to  view  the  moral  perfection  of  God,  His  separation  from 
all  that  is  in  the  slightest  degree  sinful  or  evil.  "  God  is 
light,  and  in  him  is  no  darkness  at  all  "  (1  John  i.  5).  It 
is  the  perfect  purity,  the  absolute  goodness  of  God. 

But  at  the  best  there  is  something  negative  about  this 
conception  of  God.  Holiness  tells  us  that  there  is  such  a 
thing  as  moral  perfection,  but  not  what  it  is.  It  gives  us 
the  form,  but  not  the  contents  of  the  fact  we  are  seeking. 
In  what  does  this  absolute  goodness  which  we  call  holi- 
ness consist  ?  The  answer  is,  that  it  consists  in  love. 
Love  gives  us  the  material  or  essential  principle  of  God's 
moral  nature.  Oiir  previous  discussions  have  familiarized 
us  with  the  definition  of  love.  It  is  self-bestowal,  self- 
communication.  The  being  who  loves  finds  his  own  high- 
est good  in  the  good  of  others.  I  do  not  say  that  he 
finds  his  own  highest  happiness  in  the  happiness  of 
others.  This  is  true,  but  it  is  not  the  whole  truth,  and  it 
is  a  truth  which  at  most  finds  only  a  partial  realization 
in  a  world  of  sin.  The  highest  good  here  spoken  of  is 
the  highest  well-being,  which  is  primarily  moral  good  and 
only  secondarily  happiness.  Love  may  be  known  through 
its  opposite,  selfishness.  Selfishness  is  self-seeking,  the 
making  one's  own  happiness  the  chief  end.  Its  principle 
is  isolation.  But  love  looks  away  from  self,  it  seeks  to 
give  rather  than  to  receive.  Its  principle  is  sacrifice,  by 
which  I  mean  not  necessarily  privation  or  pain,  but  the 


THE   CHRISTIAN   CONCEPTION   OF   GOD  211 

bestowal  of  one's  best  on  others.  Suffering  may  become 
an  element  in  sacrifice  when  it  is  exercised  in  a  world  of 
sin,  but  even  then  it  is  incidental,  rather  than  essential, 
to  it.  God's  love  may  be  the  bliss,  unalloyed  by  suffer- 
ing, of  His  eternal  being  as  the  blessed  Trinity.  It  may 
be  the  happy  bestowal  of  His  perfections  upon  the  pure 
spirits  in  heaven.  It  may  be  the  love  that  takes  upon 
itself  suffering  and  privation  for  the  redemption  of  a 
fallen  race.  But  in  every  case  it  is  sacrifice,  the  free  giv- 
ing of  self  to  others.  He  is  no  God  wrapped  up  in  the 
isolation  of  a  selfish  concern  for  His  own  happiness.  If 
He  were.  He  would  no  longer  be  the  holy  God,  for  such 
selfishness  is  the  very  essence  of  sin.  It  is  His  nature  to 
go  out  from  Himself,  to  communicate  Himself  and  His 
blessedness  to  others.  The  Bible  tells  us,  indeed,  that  the 
chief  end  of  God  is  His  own  glory ;  but  it  also  tells  us 
that  His  highest  glory  is  realized  in  redemption,  and  that 
His  chief  end  is  the  establishment  of  His  kingdom,  which 
is  a  kingdom  of  love  and  grace. 

11.  The  Bible  in  all  its  parts  teaches  that  God  is  holy 
love.  This  is  what  distinguishes  it  from  every  other  re- 
ligious book.  With  different  emphasis  in  different  stages 
of  the  redemptive  revelation,  but  everywhere  with  clear 
recognition  of  their  essentiality,  the  two  aspects  of  the  di- 
vine perfection,  the  holiness  and  the  love,  are  consistently 
asserted. 

The  Old  Testament  gives  greater  prominence  to  the 
formal  aspect,  the  holiness  of  God.  It  is  easy  to  see  why 
this  was  the  case.  The  Israelites  were  surrounded  by 
heathen  nations  who  were  addicted  to  the  most  degrad- 
ing kinds  of  idolatry.  The  conceptions  of  God  current 
among  these  idolaters  were  low  and  unworthy.  Sinful 
men  attributed  to  their  deities  all  their  own  worst  pas- 
sions and  vices.  Heathenism,  even  in  its  highest  forms, 
did  not  hesitate  to  ascribe  moral  evil  to  God.  Or  if  in 
the  dualistic  religions  it  was  able  paitially  to  avoid  this 


212  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

error,  it  was  only  by  dividing  the  sway  of  the  world  be- 
tween two  principles,  the  one  of  good  and  the  other  of 
evil,  and  leaving  it  uncertain  which  has  the  npper  hand. 
The  gods  of  Greece,  according  to  the  representations  of 
their  own  votaries,  broke  every  commandment  of  the 
Decalogue.  They  were  murderers,  liars,  adulterers,  re- 
vengeful, cruel.  The  most  unblushing  licentiousness  was 
practised  at  the  shrines  of  many  of  their  deities,  under 
their  supposed  sanction.  The  worship  of  Moloch,  with 
its  slaughter  of  innocent  children,  throws  a  lurid  light 
upon  the  idolatry  of  Palestine.  Now  the  great  lesson 
God  had  to  teach  Israel  was,  that  He  is  lioly.  This  is  the 
key-note  of  the  Old  Testament.  It  is  struck  at  the  very 
beginning  of  the  redemptive  revelation.  The  utter  and 
iri-econcilable  difference  between  Jehovah  and  the  so- 
called  gods  of  the  heathen  lay  in  the  fact  that  He  was  a 
Being  of  perfect  goodness,  while  they  were  unholy  and 
evil.  Abraham  gives  liis  confession  of  faith  when  he 
asks,  "  Shall  not  the  Judge  of  all  the  earth  do  right  ? " 
(Gen.  xviii.  25).  Only  a  divine  revelation  could  have 
given  him  such  a  conception  of  God  as  that.  The  He- 
brew word  which  is  translated  holy  points  to  God  as 
separated  from  all  that  is  sinful  and  unclean.  The  ex- 
istence of  Israel  as  the  Chosen  People  was  based  upon 
the  holiness  of  God — "  And  ye  shall  be  holy  unto  me  : 
for  I  the  Lord  am  holy,  and  have  severed  you  from  other 
people,  that  ye  should  be  mine  "  (Lev.  xx.  26).  "  Be  ye 
holy  ;  for  I  am  the  Lord  your  God  "  (Lev.  xx.  Y).  The 
Law  was  intended  not  only  to  teach  the  Israelites  how 
to  become  holj',  but  to  impress  upon  their  minds  the  holi- 
ness of  God.  All  the  institutions  of  the  Jewish  The- 
ocracy were  intended  to  emphasize  this  great  truth.  The 
Tabernacle  and  the  Temple,  with  their  elaborate  cere- 
monial, the  consecration  of  the  priests,  the  anointing  of 
the  kings,  the  call  and  inspiration  of  the  prophets,  all 
turned  the  thoughts  of  the  pious  Israelite  to  the  glorious 


THE   CHRISTIAN   CONCEPTION    OF   GOD  218 

holiness  of  his  God.  The  divine  dealings  with  Israel  in 
the  long  course  of  the  sacred  history  tended  to  the  same 
end.  Tlie  two  strains  which  constantly  sound  forth  from 
the  prophetic  message,  redemption  and  judgment,  tell  of 
God's  perfect  goodness  and  His  unconquerable  aversion  to 
all  sin.  And  out  of  the  divine  holiness  flowed  the  faith- 
fulness, the  truth,  and  the  justice  of  God. 

But  while  God's  holiness  is  emphasized  in  the  Old 
Testament,  the  material  aspect  of  the  divine  perfection  is 
not  ignored.  It  could  not  be,  for  love  is  essential  to  re- 
demption, and  redemption  is  the  great  theme  of  the 
earlier,  as  of  the  later,  revelation.  The  choice  of  Israel  as 
God's  peculiar  people  and  all  His  dealings  with  them  in 
the  long  course  of  their  history  were  the  outcome  of  love. 
"  The  Lord  had  a  delight  in  thy  fathers  to  love  them,  and 
he  chose  their  seed  after  them,  even  you  above  all 
people,  as  it  is  this  day "  (Deut.  x.  15).  "  The  Lord 
loveth  the  gates  of  Zion  "  (Ps.  Ixxxvii.  2).  God  is  the 
Father  of  Israel  (Deut.  xxxii.  6,  19  ;  Jer.  xxxi.  9,  20). 
The  true  Israelite  recognized  in  all  God's  relations  to  His 
people  the  constant  evidences  of  His  love.  ^Nevertheless, 
the  holiness  was  more  manifest.  There  was  a  narrowness 
about  the  Old  Testament  standpoint  which  prevented  the 
full  revelation  of  the  divine  love.  Love  is  something  that 
cannot  be  made  known  by  merely  talking  about  it.  It 
must  be  experienced  to  be  understood.  It  was  present  in 
God's  heart  and  redemptive  work  from  the  first,  but  it 
could  only  gradually  be  brought  into  the  sphere  of  human 
life,  so  that  men  could  see  it  for  what  it  was.  At  the 
most  the  Old  Testament  dispensation  of  God's  kingdom 
was  confined  to  Israel.  The  pious  Isi-aelite  was  impressed 
with  the  idea  of  God's  love  to  his  nation  rather  than  to 
himself  as  an  individual,  and  the  thought  of  a  universal 
love,  extending  to  all  nations  and  to  every  individual  of 
the  human  race,  was  too  great  for  him.  It  is  only  in  the 
predictions  of  the  coming  dispensation  and  the  spiritual 


214  PRESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

kiugdom  of  God,  that  we  discover  anticipations  of  the 
great  truth,  or  rather  I  may  say,  the  great  fact,  which  was 
to  transform  the  world.  The  prophets^  standing  on  the 
mountain  height  of  inspiration,  see  on  the  far  horizon  of 
the  future  the  new  covenant,  with  its  divine  forgiveness 
and  the  divine  love  and  Fatherhood  for  all  mankind. 

When  we  pass  from  the  Old  Testament  to  the  Kew  we 
come  into  an  entirely  new  sphere  of  revelation.  The  ele- 
ment of  holiness  no  longer  receives  the  stronger  empha- 
sis. This  is  laid  upon  the  love  of  God.  The  holiness  is 
not  ignored.  It  is  as  constantly  and  consistently  asserted 
as  in  the  Old  Testament.  It  is  everywhere  taken  for 
granted.  Christ  and  the  Apostles  uphold  with  unvary- 
ing earnestness  the  absolute  moral  perfection  of  God. 
There  is  One  good,  that  is,  God.  One  jot  or  one  tittle 
shall  in  nowise  depart  from  the  law  until  all  be  fulfilled. 
The  faithfulness,  the  truth,  the  justice  of  the  divine  char- 
acter are  taught  in  the  same  terms,  and  often  with  stronger 
emphasis,  than  in  the  earlier  revelation.  Nevertheless, 
the  chief  stress  is  laid  upon  the  love  of  God.  Men  were 
now  to  be  taught  in  what  the  holiness  of  God  consisted, 
and  to  understand  that  it  was  love.  This  was  possible 
now,  because  the  divine  love  had  actually  come  in  all  its 
fulness  into  the  sphere  of  human  life.  God  had  given 
the  supreme  proof  of  His  love  in  the  gift  of  His  Son.  It 
was  not  to  be  a  mere  matter  of  words,  but  the  J'act  was 
to  be  made  manifest.  In  the  person  of  the  Saviour  the 
divine  love  entered  the  world.  He  was,  as  we  have  seen, 
the  eternal  object  of  the  love  of  God  in  the  mystery  of 
the  blessed  Trinity.  Now  that  God's  love  was  turned 
manward,  he  came,  bringing  to  man,  for  the  redemption 
of  the  race,  the  whole  love  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Spirit.  Jesus  was  the  personal,  visible  love  of  God.  He 
showed  men  the  Father.  All  his  acts  and  all  his  words 
bore  the  stamp  of  love  upon  them.  His  death  upon  the 
cross  gave  mankind  an  idea  of  unselfish  sacrifice  w^hich 


THE   CHKISTIAN   CONCEPTION   OF   GOD  215 

showed  itself  "by  its  greatness  and  depth  to  be  divine. 
He  taught  men  how  to, love,  revealing  to  them  the  beautj', 
the  blessedness,  the  holiness  of  self-sacrifice.  He  made 
them  know  the  truth  of  what  at  first  seems  a  paradox, 
that  whoso  will  save  his  life  shall  lose  it,  and  whoso  will 
lose  his  life  for  Christ's  sake  shall  find  it.  He  revealed 
to  them  the  truth  that  greatness  consists  in  service,  since 
even  God  has  shown  His  highest  glory  by  stooping  to 
mankind  and  enduring  suffering,  shame,  and  death  in  the 
person  of  the  Christ.  "  The  Son  of  man  came  not  to  be 
ministered  unto  but  to  minister,  and  to  give  his  life  a  ran- 
som for  many  "  (Matt.  xx.  28). 

The  Saviour's  teachings  concerning  the  love  of  God 
found  especial  and  striking  expression  in  his  doctrine  of 
the  Fatherhood  of  God.  Only  the  eternal  Son  knew  the 
Father  (Matt.  xi.  27  ;  John  i.  18),  and  now  he  had  come 
to  make  known  to  men  the  blessed  fact  that  the  eternal 
God  is  the  Father  of  men.  All  the  tender  relations  which 
subsist  between  earthly  parents  and  their  children  are 
illustrative  of  the  relations  in  which  the  Almighty  stands 
toward  sinfnl  humanity.  Christ  taught  men  to  see  even 
in  the  ordinary  operations  of  the  'divine  providence  the 
evidences  of  God's  fatherly  love.  But  still  more  in  the 
operations  of  Ilis  grace.  "  When  ye  pray,  say.  Our  Fa- 
ther ; "  "  If  ye,  then,  being  evil,  know  how  to  give  good 
gifts  unto  your  children  ;  how  much  more  shall  your  heav- 
enly Father  give  the  Holy  Spirit  to  them  that  ask  him  ?  " 
(Luke  xi.  2,  13). 

What  Christ  teaches  with  so  much  earnestness,  his  dis- 
ciples proclaim  with  equal  emphasis  after  his  ascension. 
The  Spirit  of  the  risen  Christ  continues  to  utter  through 
his  inspired  followers  the  message  of  love  and  of  the  di- 
vine Fatherhood.  Upon  it  all  their  teaching  was  based. 
This  was  what  rendered  their  preaching  a  Gospel — a  mes- 
sage of  good  tidings. 

Several  facts  impress   themselves  with   especial  force 


216  PRESENT   DAT   THEOLOGY 

upon  us  as  we  examine  this  New  Testament  revelation  of 
the  divine  character.  First  among  these  is  tlie  univei'sal- 
ity  of  the  love  of  God.  The  distinctive  mai'k  of  the  Old 
Dispensation  is  its  particularism ;  that  of  the  Kew  is  its 
catholicity.  God's  method  of  election,  according  to  which 
a  single  people  was  chosen  and  educated  to  he  the  hearer 
of  His  redemption  to  mankind,  made  it  impossible  that 
tlie  breadth  of  the  divine  grace  should  be  revealed  at 
first.  It  was  always  a  fact,  but  men  did  not  know  it  as 
such.  But  the  New  Dispensation  was  universal.  "  God 
so  loved  the  world  that  he  gave  his  only-begotten  Son  " 
(John  iii.  16) — not  Israel,  not  certain  individuals  in  the 
race,  but  all  mankind.  All  the  barriers  that  existed  be- 
tween men  were  broken  down  by  the  assertion  of  this 
great  fact.  Henceforth  there  was  neither  Greek  nor  Jew, 
bond  nor  free.  The  Apostles  went  out  preaching  a  Gos- 
pel for  all  men,  a  love  of  God  as  bi'oad  as  mankind.  God 
is  the  Father  of  all  men  ;  every  man  is  His  child.  The 
redemption  which  Christ  wrought  out  is  for  all.  He  said 
himself,  "  And  I,  if  I  be  lifted  up  from  the  earth,  will 
draw  all  men  unto  me  "  (John  xii,  32).  His  inspired  dis- 
ciples said,  that  he  by  the  grace  of  God  tasted  death  for 
every  man  (Heb.  ii,  9),  and  that  God  "  willeth  that  all 
men  should  be  saved  and  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the 
truth  "  (1  Tim.  ii.  4).  In  making  these  statements,  I  am 
aware  that  the  New  Testament  speaks  especially  of  the 
love  of  God  to  those  who  by  faith  have  become  partakers 
of  His  grace,  and  that  He  is  more  commonly  called  the 
Father  of  such.  This  is  Avhat  is  to  be  expected,  since  the 
love  of  God  can  be  made  perfect  only  whei-e  it  is  accepted 
and  returned  by  human  love,  and  since  the  relation  of  fa- 
therhood exists  in  its  fulness  only  where  the  reciprocal 
relation  of  a  genuine  sonship  has  been  established,  a  son- 
ship  that  involves  the  free  and  joyous  recognition  of  the 
divine  Fatherhood.  But  most  emphatically  do  I  deny 
that  the  New  Testament  confines  the  divine  love  and  Fa- 


THE   CHRISTIAN    CONCEPTION    OF   GOD  217 

therhood  exclusively  to  believers.  Rather  it  represents 
them  as  universal,  so  far  as  God  is  concerned.  The  re- 
striction is  not  His,  but  that  of  the  sinful  men  who  M^ill 
not  accept  His  love.  The  divine  redemption  which 
Christ  has  wrought  is  a  redemption  for  the  race.  It  is 
full  and  free.  It  is  complete,  and  all  men  have  to  do  is 
to  accept  it.  Men  may  know  it  or  be  ignorant  of  it,  but 
all  the  same  God  loves  them  and  is  their  Father,  and  is 
bending  over  them  in  paternal  longing  for  their  good.  It 
is  their  fault  if  they  reject  His  love  and  turn  love  into 
holy  wrath.  The  parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son  is  the  story 
of  God's  relation  to  us.  While  the  son  is  spending  his 
substance  in  riotous  living,  and  when  he  is  feeding  on  the 
husks,  the  father  is  still  his  father,  keeping  a  place  for 
him  in  his  heart  and  home,  ready  to  welcome  him  with 
outstretched  arms  and  the  kiss  of  reconciliation  when  he 
returns  (Luke  xv.  11-32).  The  relation  of  fatherhood, 
which  has  from  the  first  existed,  is  the  basis  of  the  recon- 
ciliation and  restoration. 

A  second  fact  which  impresses  itself  upon  us  in  this 
connection  is  the  undeservedness,  so  far  as  men  are  con- 
cerned, of  this  divine  love.  This  is  what  gives  it  its  char- 
acter as  redemptive  love.  No  other  religion  has  grasped 
this  idea,  and  no  other  except  this  could,  since  no  other  is 
divine.  If  it  is  the  nature  of  all  love  to  give,  God's  love 
has  discovered  the  true  secret  of  giving.  He  bestows  His 
favors  on  the  unthankful  and  unworthy.  "  Herein  is 
love,  not  that  we  loved  God,  but  that  he  loved  us,  and 
sent  his  Son  to  be  the  propitiation  for  our  sins  "  (1  John 
iv.  10).  "  God  commendeth  his  love  toward  us,  in  that, 
while  we  were  yet  sinners,  Christ  died  for  us  "  (Rom.  v. 
8).  This  is  where  the  conception  of  God  as  holiness  falls 
so  far  behind  that  of  Him  as  love.  Mere  holiness  would 
suggest  a  dealing  of  God  with  men  upon  principles  of 
mere  justice,  the  quid  pro  quo.  According  to  this  idea  of 
God's  character  men  would  get  their  deserts,  no  more  and 


218  PKESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

no  less.  But  love  follows  a  very  different  principle.  It 
utterly  refuses  to  be  limited  by  desert.  The  ill  desert, 
the  sin  of  men,  is  a  call  to  a  higher  exhibition  of  grace. 
The  love  of  God  goes  not  where  it  is  best  deserved,  but 
where  it  is  most  needed  and  where  it  will  do  the  most 
good.  There  is  joy  in  heaven  over  one  sinner  that  repent- 
eth,  more  than  over  ninety  and  nine  just  persons  which  need 
no  repentance  (Luke  xv.  7).  "  Man's  extremity  is  God's 
opportunity."  One  of  God's  chief  reasons  for  permitting 
sin  to  exist  may  have  been  that  He  might  be  able  to  man- 
ifest His  grace  as  He  could  not  otherwise. 

Still  another  fact  at  which  we  must  glance  before  we 
leave  this  branch  of  our  subject  is  the  purpose  of  the  divine 
love.  It  is  to  produce  love  in  men.  Redemption  is  the 
restoration  of  love  in  men  by  means  of  the  love  of  God. 
The  Old  Testament  motive  is,  as  we  have  seen,  "  Be  ye 
holy,  for  I  am  holy ;  "  the  New  Testament  is,  "  We  love 
him,  because  he  first  loved  us"  (1  John  iv.  19),  and  "If 
God  so  loved  us,  we  ought  also  to  love  one  another  "  (lb. 
iv.  11).  There  is  nothing  like  love  to  call  forth  love. 
There  is  a  contagious  power  in  it  which  nothing  else  has. 
Nothing  will  so  evoke  all  latent  germs  of  nobleness.  Un- 
less the  heart  is  utterly  obdurate  it  must  yield  at  last  to 
this  gentle,  persuasive,  all-powerful  influence.  Here  is 
the  wonderful  secret  of  God's  method,  so  different  from 
an}'  method  that  man  ever  devised  or  could  ever  think  of 
devising,  for  overcoming  sin  and  restoring  the  soul  to  the 
beauty  of  holiness.  No  one  except  God  could  have  de- 
vised it.  It  has  that  simplicity  which  belongs  to  truth 
and  nature.  It  is  like  the  law  of  gravitation  in  the  physi- 
cal sphere,  bringing  all  things  into  unity.  Compare  it 
with  our  poor  human  devices  for  raising  men  out  of  their 
degradation  by  education,  by  culture,  by  reform.  What 
do  they  amount  to,  unless  they  borrow  something  of  God's 
method  ?  What  the  light  and  heat  of  the  sun  are  in  the 
natural  world — the   source   of   all   life  and  activity  and 


I 


THE   CHRISTIAN"   CONCEPTIOISr   OF   GOD  219 

wholesomeness — the  love  of  God  is  in  the  spiritual  world. 
God  is  love.  Those  short  words  unlock  the  mysteries  of 
the  universe. 

III.  We  are  now  ready  to  appreciate  the  importance  of 
these  facts  in  theology.  It  cannot  be  overestimated.  For 
theology  is  the  science  of  God  and  divine  things ;  it  views 
the  creation  only  in  its  relation  to  God  ;  it  considers  man 
in  his  divine  connections  as  a  being  made  by  God  and  for 
God.  Hence  everything  turns  upon  the  conception  of 
God  which  theology  maintains.  And  it  is  not  enough  to 
have  a  correct  conception  of  God  in  His  physical  and  on- 
tological  attributes,  or  even  to  think  rightly  regarding  His 
wisdom  and  His  knowledge.  We  have  to  do  exclusively 
with  moral  and  spiritual  subjects,  and  the  question  of 
questions  for  us  to  answer  must  be,  What  is  the  moral 
and  spiritual  nature  of  God  ?  It  seems  strange  that  so 
little  is  made  of  this  in  our  treatises  on  theology.  Every- 
thing else  has  ample  discussion,  but  this  is  neglected. 
And  yet  upon  this  everything  depends. 

We  need  to  bear  in  mind  that  we  are  dealing  here  with 
facts.  It  is  the  living  God  with  whom  theology  has  to 
do,  not  with  an  abstraction  of  the  intellect.  The  distinc- 
tion between  truths  and  facts,  upon  which  every  profound 
thinker  since  the  days  of  Plato  has  laid  such  stress,  needs 
to  be  jealously  maintained.  The  question  is  not  what 
views  of  God's  moral  character  best  express  our  highest 
ideals,  but  what  is  the  actual  moral  character  of  God  ? 
Let  us  in  theology  have  the  courage  of  our  convictions,  if 
we  have  any.  Let  us  believe  that  God  is,  and  that  He  is 
a  rewarder  of  them  that  diligently  seek  Him.  It  is  the 
part  of  children,  not  of  men,  to  play  with  puppets  instead 
of  realities.  This  universe  is  a  very  real  thing,  and  our 
life  in  it  is  equally  real.  What  is  the  nature  of  its  Cause 
and  Ground  ?  Is  the  world  the  battle-field  of  moral  forces 
which  gain  no  settled  victory,  the  good  now  triumphant 
and  to-morrow  defeated,  in  endless  and  hopeless  ebb  and 


220  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

flow  ?  Or  is  there  a  dominance  of  evil,  as  the  pessimist 
claims?  Or  is  there  a  Being  who  is  just,  according  to  a 
certain  low  standard  of  justice,  but  without  pity  or  love  ? 
Or  is  the  regnant  power,  M'hich  extends  to  everything  and 
embraces  everything,  that  love  which  Christ  came  to  earth 
to  reveal,  that  holy  love  which  seeks  to  restore  mankind 
to  perfect  love  ?  Is  there  a  Fatherhood  so  comprehensive 
and  minute  that  not  a  sparrow  falls  to  the  earth  without 
its  compassionate  regard,  and  the  very  hairs  of  the  hum- 
blest head  are  numbered  ?  These  are  questions  of  untold 
importance.  They  have  to  do  not  with  speculations  but 
with  facts.  We  may  turn  over  in  our  thought  month 
after  month,  and  year  after  year,  the  ontological  problems 
of  the  Trinity,  or  the  interesting  questions  connected  with 
the  Kenosis  of  Christ,  or  the  grave  inquiries  of  eschatol- 
ogy.  We  may,  after  years  of  thought,  be  as  far  as  ever 
from  solving  them,  and  yet  we  can  lie  down  at  night  and 
sleep  sweetly,  though  we  be  ignorant  of  their  truth.  Yea, 
we  may  lie  down  and  die  with  them  unsolved,  waiting  for 
that  fuller  knowledge  which  shall  come  when  the  partial 
shall  be  done  away  and  we  shall  know  even  as  we  are 
known.  But  the  question  of  God's  moral  character  is  one 
we  cannot  for  a  day  leave  unanswered.  The  sweetest  sleep 
is  embittered  if  we  know  not  what  is  the  nature  of  the 
God  who  rules  us.  Death  is  a  terror  if  we  are  ignorant 
of  the  God  into  whose  presence  we  are  to  be  ushered. 

Now  there  is  no  excuse  for  ignorance  on  this  subject,  so 
far  as  those  are  concerned  who  have  the  Bible  and  have 
thus  the  opportunity  to  know  God  as  He  has  revealed 
Himself  through  Jesus  Christ  His  Son  ;  yea,  more,  who 
have  experienced  in  their  own  souls  the  forgiving  grace  of 
God  in  Christ  and  the  regenerating  and  sanctifying  power 
of  the  Holy  Spirit.  It  is  not  only  their  privilege  but  their 
duty  to  understand  God  as  He  is,  and  to  make  known  the 
blessed  truth  to  their  fellow-men.  And  the  theologian, 
above  all  others,  as  the  professed  teacher  of  the  highest 


I 


THE   CllKISTIAN   CONCEPTION   OF   GOD  221 

trutbj  cannot  neglect  the  fundamental  facts  of  his  sacred 
science.  The  theological  system  that  begins  in  confused  or 
false  conceptions  of  God  will  end  in  a  caricature  of  God, 

The  truth  respecting  God  which  Cliristian  theology  has 
to  maintain  is  that  which  we  have  found  in  tlie  Bible, 
namely,  that  He  is  holy  love.  Both  factors  in  the  one  con- 
ception need  to  be  carefully  guarded.  God  is  not  holiness 
without  love  nor  love  without  holiness.  Our  temptation, 
in  discussing  the  great  questions  of  theology,  is  to  vibrate 
between  the  two  extremes  which  these  aspects  of  God's 
perfection  present,  when  viewed  apart  from  each  other. 
We  unduly  emphasize  the  holiness  or  the  love.  We  want 
the  form  at  the  expense  of  the  contents,  or  the  contents 
to  the  detriment  of  the  form.  We  do  not  readily  hold 
the  two  together  in  their  inseparable  unity.  It  is  hard  to 
say  which  error  is  the  greater.  Both  have  wrought  in- 
calculable mischief  in  theology. 

We  may  not  abridge  the  holiness  of  God.  This  is  a 
temptation  to  which  we  are  constantly  subject.  Because 
we  are  sinners,  we  find  it  difficult  to  conceive  of  an  abso- 
lutely holy  Being.  We  think  that  God  is  altogether 
such  an  one  as  ourselves  (Ps.  1.  21).  Or  even,  if  we  be- 
lieve in  the  abstract  that  He  is  holy,  we  attribute  to  Him 
dispositions  and  acts  which  are  morally  indefensible. 
Thus  we  think  of  Him  as  an  easy-going,  merely  benevo- 
lent Being,  to  whom  sin  is  a  comparatively  small  matter, 
who  lets  men  go  on  pretty  much  as  they  please,  and  is 
ready  always  upon  evidence  of  sorrow  for  the  past  to  for- 
give and  forget.  The  effect  upon  om-  theology  is  disas- 
trous. Instead  of  being  the  Governor  and  Controller  of 
His  universe,  moral  as  well  as  material,  He  becomes  in 
om*  thought  a  lioi  faineant^  an  inefficient  Sovereign,  who 
looks  idly  on  while  His  subjects  get  the  upper  hand  and  is 
too  kind  to  interfere.  The  result  is  a  low  view  of  sin. 
Unless  God  is  absolutely  holy,  sin  is  not  absolutely  evil ; 
it  is  infirmity  rather  than  sin,  a  necessary  incident  of  hu- 


222  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

man  growth,  an  indication  of  our  finiteness  rather  tlian 
onr  guilt.  When  our  conception  of  sin  has  become  thus  at- 
tenuated, redemption  loses  its  significance.  For  what  is 
the  pressing  necessity  of  deliverance  if  sin  is  only  a  rel- 
ative evil  and  God  views  it  with  indulgence  ?  What  men 
need,  if  this  be  the  true  view,  is  not  redemption  but  train- 
ing, not  deliverance  but  culture.  Accordingly',  the  death 
of  Christ,  instead  of  being  a  moral  necessity,  without 
which  God  could  not  be  at  once  just  and  the  sinner's  Jus- 
tifier ;  instead  of  being  an  actual  making  good  and  repara- 
tion for  human  sin ;  instead  of  removing  the  obstacles  in 
the  divine  holiness  to  the  forgiveness  of  sin  ;  in  a  word, 
instead  of  being  an  atonement  in  the  only  true  sense  of 
the  term — the  death  of  Christ,  I  say,  becomes  merely  a 
manifestation  of  the  divine  love  to  mankind,  necessary 
only  in  so  far  as  it  affords  the  highest  evidence  of  God's 
willingness  to  forgive — a  matter,  in  fine,  of  relative  rather 
than  absolute  necessity.  The  atonement  undervalued,  the 
question  arises  as  to  whether  the  incarnation  was  neces- 
sary, or  even  whether  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  God 
actually  became  man.  The  incline,  down  which  one  so 
easily  glides  into  Arianism  and  Humanitarianism  is  per- 
ilously near.  Moreover,  the  other  distinctive  doctrines  of 
the  Christian  system  are,  each  in  its  own  way,  affected. 
Regeneration  becomes  reformation.  Faith  becomes  an 
intellectual  acceptance  of  doctrines  about  God.  The 
Christian  life  loses  those  high  motives  which  arise  from 
the  recognition  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  viewed  as  a  king- 
dom of  redemption,  as  the  great  end  of  Christian  striving. 
Finally,  those  stern  words  which  Christ  spoke  respecting 
the  destiny  of  the  ungodly,  and  which  the  loyal  and  sin- 
gle-minded Christian  accepts  because  he  believes  that  the 
Saviour  who  has  taught  him  all  things  best  worth  know- 
ing understands  this  hard  subject  better  than  he,  are  ex- 
plained away,  and  a  universalism,  which  Christ  carefully 
refrained  from  teaching,  substituted  for  them. 


THE   CHRISTIAN    CONCEPTION    OF   GOD  228 

Let  me  not  be  misunderstood  in  what  has  just  been  said. 
I  do  not  mean  to  assert  that  all  who  hold  inadequate  views 
of  the  holiness  of  God  fall  into  these  errors.  I  am  only 
showing  to  what  such  views  lead  when  carried  out  to  their 
legitimate  consequences.  Moreover,  where  they  are  not 
thus  carried  out,  they  exist  as  a  tendency  which  works 
disastrously  in  theology  and  the  Christian  life.  We  need 
to  maintain  with  unyielding  firmness  the  scriptural  doc- 
trine of  the  absolute  moral  perfection,  the  holiness,  of 
God.  We  must  often  go  back  to  Sinai  and  learn  anew 
the  truth  Jehovah  taught  the  Chosen  People  amid  the 
thunderings  and  lightnings  of  the  desert  mountain. 
Otherwise  we  can  never  rightly  estimate  nor  truly  teach 
the  meaning  of  Calvary. 

But  it  is  equally  important  that  we  should  not  abridge 
the  love  of  God.  This  is  a  temptation  which  is  experi- 
enced in  all  ages  of  the  Christian  church,  and  which  has 
especially  assailed  those  who  hold  high  but  narrow  views 
of  the  divine  holiness.  The  two  great  men  who  have  done 
so  much  to  shape  the  theology  of  Christendom,  Augustin 
and  Calvin — men  whose  names  should  never  be  mentioned 
without  reverence  and  who  have  been  most  reviled  by 
those  who  have  known  them  the  least — have  not  escaped 
this  error.  We  have  seen  that  the  Old  Testament  revela- 
tion of  God,  in  which  the  chief  emphasis  was  laid  upon 
His  holiness,  had  a  certain  narrowness  about  it  which  was 
incidental  to  the  stage  of  development  of  God's  kingdom 
to  which  it  belonged.  So  far  as  it  contained  a  doctrine  of 
the  divine  love,  it  was  presented  in  the  form  of  particular- 
ism. It  was  the  love  of  God  to  Israel,  and  not  to  the 
world.  Now  there  are  many  theologians  who  find  it  hard 
to  advance  beyond  the  Old  Testament  standpoint.  Al- 
though God  has  proclaimed  His  love  to  mankind  and  re- 
vealed Himself  as  the  universal  Father,  although  He  has 
freely  offered  the  finished  redemption  of  Christ  to  all  who 
will  accept  it,  they  still  teach  a  particularism  which  nar- 


224  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

rows  the  largeness  and  freeness  of  the  Gospel.  I  am  not 
anxious  to  dwell  upon  the  extreme  form  in  which  this 
view  has  been  taught,  according  to  which  God  bestows 
upon  only  a  part  of  the  race  the  opportunity  to  embrace 
the  salvation  wrought  out  by  Christ,  while  the  rest  are  con- 
demned to  everlasting  punishment  on  account  of  Adam's 
sin — a  sin,  whose  guilt  may  be  enhanced  by  their  personal 
transgressions,  but  from  whose  baleful  consequences  they 
have  no  power  to  extricate  themselves.  This  scheme  of 
doctrine  is  not  held  so  widely  as  it  once  was,  and  where  it 
is  held,  it  is  rendered  practically  innocuous  by  the  quali- 
fications and  concessions  made  by  its  advocates.  Doubt- 
less these  concessions  involve  more  or  less  of  inconsis- 
tency ;  but,  as  Neander  says,  when  criticising  Augustin 
for  breaking  the  iron  chain  of  his  system  by  admitting  the 
freedom  of  Adam's  will  in  the  first  transgression,  this  is  a 
"  noble  inconsistency,  which  grew  out  of  the  victory  of  the 
religious,  moral  feeling  over  the  logical  and  speculative 
tendency  of  his  intellect "  (Torrey's  "  Neander,"  vol.  ii.,  p. 
685).  There  is,  however,  a  widely  prevalent  view  of  God's 
character,  of  which  I  wish  to  speak.  It  does  not,  like  that 
just  mentioned,  go  to  the  extreme  of  shutting  off  a  portion 
of  the  race  from  the  opportunity  of  salvation,  but  it  never- 
theless undulj^  restricts  the  divine  love.  According  to  this 
view,  every  human  being  begins  his  earthly  career  under  the 
frown  of  God,  a  child  of  wrath.  Not  only  is  he  estranged 
from  God  but  God  is  estranged  from  him.  God  is  His 
creativ^e  Father,  that  is,  God  has  called  him  into  existence 
and  bestows  upon  him  the  common  blessings  of  His  prov- 
idence— causing  His  sun  to  rise  upon  him  and  His  rain 
to  fall  upon  him — but  God  is  not  his  moral  and  spiritual 
Father.  God  does  not  love  him,  in  any  but  that  general 
and  common  benevolence  which  is  bestowed  upon  all  His 
creatures.  The  sinner  enters  into  God's  love  only  when 
his  sins  are  forgiven  and  he  is  born  by  regeneration  into 
the  kino-doni.     Then  for  the  first  time  God  becomes  his 


THE   CHRISTIAN   CONCEPTION   OF   GOD  225 

Father  in  the  spiritual  sense  of  the  term.  Then  for  the 
first  time  he  has  the  right  to  saj  the  Lord's  Prayer.  Then 
he  comes  for  tlie  first  time  into  relation  to  the  grace  of 
Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit. 

Now  I  know  that  there  is  an  element  of  truth  in  this 
view.  It  is  true  that  the  sinner  by  his  sin  separates  him- 
self from  God  and  draws  upon  himself  the  divine  displeas- 
ure. It  is  true  that  so  long  as  he  continues  in  his  sin  he 
can  lay  no  claim  upon  the  divine  love.  He  has  no  right, 
except  as  God  gives  him  the  right,  even  to  say,  "  Father, 
I  have  sinned  against  heaven  and  in  thy  sight ! "  Love 
for  its  full  exercise  requires  the  action  of  both  parties. 
Fatherhood  cannot  manifest  itself  in  its  complete  depth 
and  tenderness,  unless  there  is  an  answering  spirit  of  son- 
ship.  Moreover,  it  is  true  that  it  is  possible  for  God's 
child,  made  in  His  image,  blessed  by  His  love,  to  so  tear 
himself  away  from  God  and  alienate  himself  from  Him, 
that  God  finds  it  a  moral  necessity  to  turn  fj-om  him,  and 
to  leave  him  to  the  consequences  of  his  sin.  The  love  of 
God  in  its  relation  to  the  finally  and  irremediably  obdurate 
becomes  a  displeasure,  yea,  even  a  holy  wrath,  which  finds 
expression  in  punishment,  and  which  we  hesitate  whether 
to  call  love  at  all — though  it  seems  to  me  that  we  ought  to 
regard  it  as  still  love,  though  thus  changed.  But  when 
every  element  of  truth  in  this  theorj'  is  conceded,  I  cannot 
but  think  that  in  its  main  positions  it  is  unscriptural  and 
therefore  erroneous.  God's  love  is  not  so  narrow  and 
grudging  as  this.  His  Fatherhood  is  not  confined  to  a 
part  of  mankind.  Through  Christ  He  has  made  provision 
for  the  redemption  of  all  mankind.  His  love  made  the 
world  and  brought  the  race  into  being.  His  love  has  at- 
tended mankind  in  all  the  long  history  since  the  creation. 
His  love  first  gives  us  our  individual  being.  We  are  born 
into  His  love.  The  infant  who  enters  this  sinful  world, 
with  the  disadvantage  of  the  tendencies  to  sin  it  has  in- 
herited from  its  ancestors,  is  enfolded  from  its  first  breath 
15 


226  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

ill  the  Father's  love.  Christ  gave  Iiis  estimate  of  God's 
relation  to  children  when  he  said,  "  Of  snch  is  the  king- 
dom of  lieaven,"  and  "  In  heaven  their  angels  do  always 
behold  the  face  of  my  Father  which  is  in  heaven  "  (Matt. 
xix.  14,  xviii.  10).  When  the  infant  comes  to  the  age  of 
responsibility  and  goes  astray,  as  every  child  of  man  does, 
led  by  the  temptation  of  the  world  without  and  the  evil 
tendencies  within,  God's  paternal  love  still  follows  it. 
Even  where  the  prodigal  goes  into  the  far  country  the 
Father's  love  goes  with  him.  God  longs  and  yearns  and 
labors  to  bring  back  His  child  to  Himself.  He  speaks 
through  His  providence,  through  His  Spirit,  by  the  mouth 
of  preachers  and  parents  and  friends.  All  life  long  He 
follows  His  child,  and  will  not  let  him  go  while  there  is 
any  hope.  And  at  the  last,  if  God's  love  has  been  stub- 
bornly refused  and  there  is  no  more  that  divine  mercy  and 
compassion  can  do,  the  damning  guilt  which  calls  for  pun- 
ishment is  not  the  guilt  of  Adam,  not  the  infirmity  or  the 
inevitable  sin,  if  there  be  such,  of  the  man,  nor  even  the 
great  and  inexcusable  individual  sins,  but  the  great  crown- 
ing guilt  of  rejecting  this  persistent  love  of  God.  We  can 
see  enough  to  be  sure  that  this  is  the  case  with  those  who 
are  brought  up  in  Christian  lands  and  hear  the  Gospel  of 
God's  grace.  We  have  faith  to  believe  that  it  is  so  in  the 
case  of  the  heathen.  There  is  no  man,  however  remote, 
however  ignorant,  however  insignificant  in  human  esti- 
mation, to  whom  God  is  not  a  Father  and  who  is  not  all 
his  life  long  surrounded  by  the  divine  love.  The  love  of 
God  is  like  the  air  of  heaven  ;  it  belongs  to  all  men.  It  is 
theirs  whether  they  know  it  or  not.  God  is  as  much  the 
Father  of  the  Hindoo  or  the  Chinaman  as  your  Father  or 
mine.  The  poor  degraded  black  man  of  the  Congo, 
though  he  knows  it  not,  lives  and  moves  and  has  his  being 
in  the  divine  love.  Indeed,  God  must  love  him  in  some 
respects  more  than  He  does  us.  It  is  the  nature  of  love 
in  men  to  bestow  itself  where  there  is  most  need.     How 


THE   CHRISTIAN    CONCEPTION    OF   GOD  227 

dare  we  think  that  God's  love  is  less  compassionate  than 
ours  ?  He  is  not  going  to  take  advantage  of  the  heathen's 
ignorance  to  make  him  suffer  a  heavier  punishment  in  the 
other  world,  but  will  make  it  more  tolerable  for  him  at 
the  day  of  judgment  because  of  this  very  ignorance. 

Where  such  a  view  of  God's  character  is  held,  the 
Christian's  work  in  the  world  will  be  cheerful  and  hopeful. 
His  theology  will  be  full  of  God's  own  light.  A  world 
that  originated  in  God's  love  and  is  goino;  onward  in  God's 
love  and  moving  steadily  toward  the  consummation  of 
God's  love,  must  be  a  good  world,  in  spite  of  all  that,  for 
the  time  being,  looks  dark  and  perplexing.  If  theology  is 
ever  to  be  a  power  in  the  world,  it  must  accept  this  view 
of  God  and  be  penetrated  through  and  through  with  its 
injfluence.  In  the  ancient  church,  John,  the  Apostle  of 
love,  who  pierced  farthest  into  the  depths  of  the  Saviour's 
Gospel,  was  called  "  the  theologian  ; "  he  had  found  the 
secret  of  the  science  of  God  when  he  taught  that  "  God  is 
love."  The  words  of  the  poet  Gambold,  which  Erskine  of 
Linlathen  loved  to  quote,  impress  the  same  truth  : 

"I'm  apt  to  think  the  man 
That  conld  sniToiTnd  the  snm  of  things,  and  spy 
The  heart  of  God,  and  secrets  of  His  Empire, 
Would  speak  but  love — with  him  the  bright  result 
Would  change  the  hue  of  intermediate  scenes 
And  make  one  thing  of  all  theology." 

God  is  holiness.  God  is  love.  Such  is  the  Bible  doc- 
trine of  the  divine  character.  It  is  easy  to  say  it.  It  is 
not  so  easy  to  accept  it  and  apply  it.  It  is  a  truth  men 
learn  better  in  their  closets  on  their  knees  than  in  books, 
better  in  active  work  for  Christ  and  God  than  in  the  theo- 
logian's lecture-room.  Slowly — very  slowly — the  world 
and  the  church  are  learning  to  know  the  holy  love  of  God. 
And  just  as  fast  as  it  is  known,  the  world  is  becoming  a 
new  world.  When  it  is  fully  known  redemption  will  be 
complete. 


XIII. 

THE  PLAN  OP  GOD. 

TnE  subject  upon  which  I  am  now  to  speak  affords  a 
beautiful  ilhistration  of  the  fact  that  true  thinkers  in  all 
departments  of  human  investigation  meet  and  agree  in  the 
highest  truth.  Genuine  science,  following  the  indications 
of  reason  and  design  in  tlie  world,  is  led  back  by  sure  and 
undeviating  steps  to  a  primal  pui'pose,  out  of  which  all  the 
varied  forms  of  the  universe  have  come.  The  philosophj 
which,  undeceived  by  the  false  lights  of  pantheism,  agnos- 
ticism, and  materialism,  seeks  to  interpret  the  nniverse  by 
what  is  highest  in  it  and  not  by  what  is  lowest,  finds  satis- 
faction only  in  an  eternal  Keason,  of  whose  conscious  pur- 
pose finite  things  are  the  expression.  Christian  theology, 
drawing  its  inspiration  alike  from  the  natural  and  the  re- 
demptive revelations,  is  borne  upward  to  the  truth  of  God's 
eternal  plan.  Men  as  different  in  their  modes  of  thought, 
and  the  times  in  which  they  lived  as  Augustin,  Plato,  and 
Agassiz  are  here  on  connnon  ground. 

The  doctrine  of  the  divine  plan  belongs,  however,  in  a 
peculiar  sense  to  theology.  It  is  a  postulate  of  science  and 
philosophy ;  it  is  a  revealed  mystery  of  theology,  M'hich 
not  only  teaches  the  fact  but  discloses  its  inmost  mean- 
ing. Revelation  enables  us  to  take  the  daring  flight  into 
the  timeless  thought  of  God,  and  from  this  transcendent 
height  to  view  the  whole  course  of  things  in  time — crea- 
tion, providence,  redemption,  God's  work,  nature's  ongo- 
ings, man's  history. 

It  is  a  test  of  the  mettle  of  a  theologian,  or  indeed  of 


THE   PLAN   OF   GOD  229 

any  thoughtful  Christian,  whether  he  is  willing  to  ascend 
to  the  height  of  the  divine  plan.  Weaklings  soon  grow 
faint  and  are  glad  to  return  to  the  level  plain  whei'e 
everything  is  smooth  and  easy.  But  strong  men  are 
made  stronger  by  the  ascent  and  the  glorious  prospect 
which  rewards  it.  They  come  down  out  of  the  Mount,  as 
Moses  did,  with  their  faces  aglow  with  the  light  of  God, 
and  all  sublunary  things  henceforth  look  differently  to 
them,  being  suffused  with  a  new  and  divine  meaning.  It 
is  the  fashion  in  these  days  to  speak  slightingly  of  Calvin- 
ism. I  do  not  mean  to  go  out  of  my  way  to  defend  it. 
But  this  I  do  say,  that  to  Calvinism,  above  all  other  re- 
ligious systems,  belongs  the  credit  of  having  dared  to  deal 
honestly  and  bravely  with  the  plan  of  God.  It  lias  faced 
truth  at  its  highest  point  and  has  not  allowed  itself  to 
be  frightened  away  by  difficulties.  Herein  has  lain  its 
strength.  This  is  what  has  drawn  strong  thinkers  to- 
ward it  and  made  it  the  nurse  of  strong  thinkers  and 
strong  Christians.  I  grant  that  Calvinism  has  been  so 
absorbed  in  the  thought  of  God's  sovereignty  that  it  has 
often  forgotten  His  love,  and  has  failed  to  recognize  the 
freedom  of  the  human  will.  But  let  us  not,  while  correct- 
ing its  defects,  turn  from  the  sources  of  its  power.  The 
faults  of  our  age  lie  in  the  opposite  direction.  "We  need 
more  iron  in  our  blood.  We  need  the  vigor  of  the  Al- 
pine air. 

I.  We  will  look  first  at  the  nature  of  the  divine  plan. 

It  originated  in  the  holy  love  of  the  Triune  God. 
God  was  indeed  complete  in  Himself;  love,  joy,  and  life 
found  their  full  satisfaction  in  the  inner  relations  and  ex- 
periences of  the  Trinity.  ]^evertheless,  it  is  the  nature 
of  love  to  give.  God  would  not  remain  shut  up  in  the 
blessedness  of  His  own  internal  life.  He  determined  to 
surround  Himself  with  created  beings,  to  whom  He  might 
manifest  His  glory  and  communicate  His  perfections. 
He  was  full,  teeming  with  all  holy  and  blessed  things,  and 


230  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

lie  desired  to  have  those  about  Ilhii  who  would  share 
llis  riches.  The  Bible  often  represents  God's  motive  in 
resolving  to  create  as  llis  own  glory.  This  appears  at 
first  sight  to  be  a  selfish  reason.  But  that  is  not  the 
meaning  of  the  Scriptuics.  The  glory  of  God  which  is 
spoken  of,  llis  declarative  glory,  as  the  theologians  call 
it,  consists  in  the  manifestation  of  llis  perfections  and 
the  communication  of  them  to  llis  creatures  (Edwards's 
"  Chief  End  of  God  in  Creation,"  Works,  vol.  iii.,  p.  81 
seq.).  The  noble  impulse  which  leads  the  artist  or  the 
poet  to  give  expression  to  their  ideals  in  painting  or  verse, 
in  order  that  others  may  share  in  the  fulness  of  their  ge- 
nius, is  akin  to  God's  motive  when  He  seeks  His  glory 
(Smith,  "System  of  Christian  Theology,"  p.  136  seq.). 
God's  glory  is  the  manifestation  of  llis  love. 

The  goal  of  the  divine  plan,  the  great  end  at  which  it 
aimed,  was  the  establishment  of  God's  kingdom  or  re- 
demption. To  this  all  else  was  subordinate.  This  was 
what  gave  unity  to  its  infinite  diversity.  The  material 
universe  was  to  be  the  theatre  of  this  great  work,  intelli- 
gent beings  the  actors  in  it ;  its  history  was  to  run  through 
the  ages,  the  God-man  was  to  be  its  author  and  finisher. 
I  know  that  in  thus  stating  the  end  of  the  divine  plan  I 
have  implied  the  existence  of  sin  as  an  essential  element 
in  it,  for  of  course  there  could  be  no  redemption  if  there 
were  no  sin.  But  it  seems  to  me  that  the  New  Testa- 
ment requires  this.  It  never  represents  God  as  contem- 
plating the  existence  of  a  universe  without  sin.  We  shall 
discuss  the  relation  of  the  divine  plan  to  sin  farther  on. 
It  is  enough  here  to  say  that  the  universe  which  took 
shape  in  the  eternal  thought  of  God  was  one  in  which 
sin  was  to  abound  while  grace  should  yet  more  abound. 
There  were  to  be  intelligent  beings  who  should  never  sin, 
and  realms  into  which  sin  should  never  enter,  and  they 
were  dear  to  God  and  had  their  important  place  in  His 
purpose.     But  the  interest  of  God's  plan  centered  in  the 


THE   PLATSr   OF   GOD  231 

drama  of  redemption,  the  establishment  of  the  kingdom 
of  God  iu  a  world  of  sin.  To  this  the  rest  was  subsidiai-y. 
The  angels  who  should  never  sin  were  to  be  "  ministering 
spirits,  sent  forth  to  minister  for  them  who  shall  be  heirs 
of  salvation  "  (Heb.  i.  14). 

Accordingly,  the  plan  stood  in  an  especial  connection 
with  Christ.  He  was  the  eternal  Logos,  who  represents 
in  a  particular  sense  the  reason  of  the  Deitj.  And  so  it 
was  iu  him  that  the  plan  was  formed.  God  beheld  the 
universe  that  was  to  be  and  all  the  process  of  redemption, 
mirrored  in  the  Word,  who  was  to  be  the  Mediator, 
Creator,  and  Kevealer.  Moreover,  tlie  God-man  was  the 
central  fact  in  the  plan.  His  incarnation  and  redemptive 
work  formed  its  very  core.  Christ  and  redemption  were 
facts  inwrought  in  the  very  substance  of  the  creation. 
All  things  were  created  by  Christ  and  for  him  (Col.  i.  16). 
Bethlehem  and  Calvary  shone  like  brilliant  lights  in  the 
eternal  purpose  of  God. 

I  have  spoken  of  the  unity  of  the  divine  plan.  It  is 
hard  for  human  thought  to  gi-asp  it.  We  form  our  plans 
in  broken  and  piecemeal  fashion,  a  part  to-day,  the  rest 
to-morrow.  We  set  our  end  before  us,  and  then  painfully 
and  slowly  work  out  the  methods  and  decide  upon  the 
means  by  which  we  shall  attain  it.  But  not  so,  God.  His 
thought  is  intuitive  and  perfect.  His  plan  is  complete 
from  the  first.  We  conceive  of  it  as  consisting  of  separate 
decrees,  successively  determined  upon.  But  this  is  our 
infirmity  of  thought.  There  is  only  one  decree,  though  it 
consists  of  many  parts  or  members.  These  parts  have  no 
order  or  succession  of  time.  Logically  one  may  come  be- 
fore another,  but  not  temporally. 

The  eternal  plan  is  all-comprehensive.  It  extends  to 
everything,  even  the  most  minute.  It  is  a  sign  of  our  im- 
perfection as  finite  beings  that  we  grasp  so  few  things  in 
our  thought.  The  general,  like  Alexander  or  Napoleon, 
who  carries  in  his  mind  the  plan  of  a  campaign  in  its  mul- 


232  PKESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

titude  of  details,  is  regarded  as  a  genius.  But  God  is  in- 
finite; He  is  omniscient  and  omnipotent.  Nothing  is  too 
great  for  Him  and  nothing  is  too  small.  His  plan,  like  His 
providence,  was  universal.  The  great  General  did  not  let 
slip  one  detail  of  the  great  campaign  against  sin  which  was 
to  be  fonght  out  in  His  universe.  The  world  He  was  going 
to  create  was  one  in  which  not  a  sparrow  should  fall  with- 
out His  notice,  and  all  things  should  work  together  for 
good  to  the  lovers  of  God.  All  things  were  to  be  subsid- 
iary in  one  way  or  another  to  redemption  and  nothing  was 
neglected,  because  nothing  was  unimportant.  The  rain- 
drop on  my  window,  the  battle  of  Waterloo,  the  death  of 
Christ,  all  had  their  place  in  that  perfect  plan.  The  laws 
and  operations  of  nature,  the  events  of  history,  the  good 
and  bad  acts  of  individual  men  were  included  in  it. 
There  were  to  be  no  surprises  to  God,  nothing  for  which 
He  had  not  provided.  He  was  from  the  first  to  have  the 
reins  in  His  hands  and  guide  the  universe  to  its  appointed 
goal.  The  AYestininster  Catechism  does  not  put  the  fact 
too  strongly  when  it  says  that  God  "  hath  foreordained 
whatsoever  comes  to  pass." 

Again,  God's  plan  is  unchangeable.  AVe  find  our  plans 
imperfect  or  unmanageable  and  alter  them  to  suit  our  pur- 
poses. But  God's  plan  was  perfect  from  the  first  and 
needed  not  to  be  changed.  He  did  not  make  a  new  plan 
when  Adam  fell ;  redemption  M'as  a  part  of  the  first  plan. 
God  has  no  afterthoughts.  In  the  infirmity  of  our  finite 
minds  we  speak  as  if  He  had,  but  this  is  not  the  fact. 
When  the  Bible  speaks  of  God  as  repenting,  as  refraining 
from  threatened  punishment,  as  altering  His  methods  of 
dealing  with  mankind,  it  views  His  actions  not  from  the 
standpoint  of  etei-nity  but  of  time.  There  is  change  in 
His  providence  but  not  in  His  decree.  It  is  change  to  us, 
not  change  to  Him.  The  change  itself  was  a  part  of  the 
one  eternal  plan,  God  always  meant  to  change,  and  by 
this  changing  in  time  He  upholds  the  immutability  of  His 


THE   PLAN   OF   GOD  233 

decree.  The  free  acts  of  men,  wliicli  seem  to  make  God 
alter  His  purposes,  were  themselves  included  in  the  eter- 
nal purpose. 

Once  more,  the  plan  of  God  is  free.  He  did  not  form  it 
from  any  necessity,  unless  it  be  the  necessity  of  love  which 
is  the  highest  freedom.  He  might  have  formed  no  plan, 
content  to  dwell  forever  in  the  blessedness  of  His  own 
Triune  life.  He  might  have  formed  an  entirely  different 
plan.  When  His  purpose  was  formed  there  was  no  being 
but  Himself  in  existence.  All  possibilities  were  before 
His  infinite  mind.  He  knew  all  that  might  be  of  things 
material  or  things  spiritual,  and  all  the  combinations  of 
these  things  in  their  infinite  variety.  All  possible  systems 
or  universes  were  open  to  Him.  God  was  not  in  a  hurry, 
for  this  was  eternity,  not  time.  He  knew  w^hat  He  was 
about.  He  did  what  He  pleased.  There  is  truth  again  in 
these  words  of  the  Catechism,  "  The  decrees  of  God  are 
his  eternal  purpose,  according  to  the  counsel  of  His  will, 
whereby  for  His  own  glory  He  hath  foreordained  whatso- 
ever comes  to  pass."  It  is  God's  freedom  in  His  plan 
which  the  Bible  and  theology  emphasize  when  they  attri- 
bute it  to  His  "good  pleasure."  Out  of  all  the  possible 
universes,  each  one  of  which  He  knew  in  all  its  details 
down  to  the  fall  of  a  sparrow.  He  chose  the  one  He  pre- 
ferred, and  that  choice  was  His  plan.  The  language  I  use 
may  seem  strong ;  but  it  is  not  too  strong  to  describe  the 
eternal  plan  of  the  Infinite  God. 

II.  We  pass  to  consider  the  relation  of  the  divdne  plan 
to  the  various  spheres  of  existence  which  it  contemplated. 
First  we  will  look  at  the  realm  of  necessity,  that  is,  at  all 
the  departments  of  being  below  the  free  and  rational  be- 
ings. We  shall  meet  here  with  no  serious  difficulties.  But 
the  view  of  the  universe  thus  given  us  is  at  once  beautiful 
and  impressive.  In  the  book  of  Proverbs  a  striking  delin- 
eation is  presented  of  the  divine  plan,  so  far  as  it  relates 
to  the  material  universe.     The  Wisdom  of  God  is  per- 


234  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

sonified  and  represented  as  telling  the  tale  of  His  decree. 
Indeed,  the  Wisdom  who  speaks  is,  as  one  of  the  most 
competent  authorities  upon  Old  Testament  theology  says, 
"  the  plan  of  the  universe  which  proceeded  from  God " 
(Oehler,  "Old  Testament  Theology,"  Am.  ed.,  p.  542). 
"  The  Lord  possessed  me  in  the  beginning  of  his  way, 
before  his  works  of  old.  I  was  set  up  from  everlasting, 
from  the  beginning,  or  ever  the  earth  was.  "When  theie 
were  no  depths,  I  was  brought  forth :  when  there  were  no 
fountains  abounding  with  water.  Before  the  mountains 
w^ere  settled,  before  the  hills  was  I  brought  forth  :  while 
as  yet  he  had  not  made  the  earth,  nor  the  fields,  nor  the 
highest  part  of  the  dust  of  the  world  "  (Prov.  viii.  22-26). 
By  the  eternal  plan  of  God  the  nature  of  created  things 
was  established,  their  laws  immutably  fixed,  and  the  whole 
course  of  nature  settled.  Modern  science,  especially  by 
its  so  widely  accepted  hypothesis  of  evolution,  presses 
upon  every  thoughtful  mind  the  necessity  of  assuming 
such  a  plan.  The  present  vast  diversity  of  forms,  inor- 
ganic and  organic,  is  the  result  of  the  operation  of  mat- 
ter and  energy  according  to  law.  Kothing  lias  come  by 
chance  or  accident.  The  long  process  of  evolution  from 
the  primitive  unorganized  substance  of  the  universe  to  the 
harmony  and  variety  of  the  present  has  been  the  result  of 
necessary  causes  working  according  to  fixed  laws.  Star- 
dust, systems,  w^orlds,  the  molten  globe,  continents  and 
seas,  mountains  and  rivers,  vegetation,  animal  life,  the 
wonderful  profusion  of  inorganic  and  oi'ganic  forms,  have 
come  each  in  its  place  and  time.  If  there  could  have  been 
a  scientist  with  mind  large  enough  and  knowledge  great 
enough  to  see  the  new-created  universe,  he  would  have 
been  able  to  calculate  from  it  all  the  course  of  natural  his- 
tory with  all  the  certainty  with  which  the  astronomer  to- 
day figures  out  an  eclipse.  But  how  shall  we  explain  the 
primordial  conditions  out  of  which  the  harmony  of  the 
Cosmos  has  flowed  ?     A  slightly  different  arrangement  of 


THE  PLAN   OF   GOD  235 

tlie  primitive  atoms,  and  a  wholly  different  universe  would 
have  resulted.  The  possible  combinations  of  those  atoms 
and  their  forces  were  infinite,  and  each  would  have  resulted 
in  a  universe  different  from  the  rest.  How  shall  we  ex- 
plain the  fact  that  just  this  universe  came,  and  no  other  ? 
We  are  inevitably  carried  out  of  science,  by  the  pressure 
of  science  itself,  into  the  realm  of  theology.  The  only 
satisfactory  explanation  is  that  which  is  furnished  by  the 
eternal  plan.  (See  Jevons,  "  Principles  of  Science,"  vol.  ii., 
p.  434  seq.,  pp.  462-464).  There  in  the  eternal  thought  of 
God  the  problem  of  the  universe  was  worked  out  in  all  its 
complicated  processes  even  to  its  minutest  details.  The 
scientist,  taking  for  his  investigation  some  little  province 
of  the  vast  universe,  traces  out  the  results  of  the  divine 
plan,  and,  as  Kepler  so  strikingly  expressed  it,  "  thinks 
God's  thought  after  Him." 

IH.  We  begin  to  face  the  real  difficulties  of  our  sub- 
ject when  we  consider  the  relation  of  the  divine  plan  to 
human  freedom.  We  need  to  advance  cautiously  and  to 
guard  ourselves  on  every  side.  We  cannot  afford  to  im- 
peril human  freedom.  It  is  a  fact  of  essential  importance 
in  morals  and  religion.  Human  responsibility  depends 
upon  it,  and  apart  from  it  we  cannot  vindicate  the  divine 
justice  in  its  relation  to  man's  character  and  conduct. 
Freedom  is  a  very  real  thing.  The  moral  consciousness 
of  every  man  testifies  to  its  reality,  even  though  his  intel- 
lect may  repudiate  it.  Determinism  in  all  its  forms  is 
subversive  of  all  true  theology,  ethics,  and  philosophy. 
But  God's  plan  in  its  all-comprehensiveness  is  also  a  real- 
ity. Bible  and  reason  alike  teach  us  that  God  is  infinite 
and  perfect.  We  cannot  conceive  of  His  leaving  anj'thing 
uncertain  or  unprovided  for.  A  God  who  is  taken  by  sur- 
prise is  no  God.  Let  us  hold  fast  the  two  facts,  God's 
all-embracing  plan  and  human  freedom,  even  though  we 
cannot  reconcile  them.  Both  are  true.  Let  neither  suf- 
fer detriment. 


280  PRESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

God's  plan  established  human  freedom.  He  desired  to 
have  in  His  universe  beings  who  should  do  His  will  not 
by  compulsion  but  of  their  own  free  choice.  This  was 
what  made  His  universe  a  moral  nniverse  instead  of  a 
merely  physical  one.  The  whole  plan  centered  in  those 
moral  facts  of  which  human  freedom  was  the  essential 
condition.  "We  may  be  sure  that  God  would  respect  what 
He  had  thus  made  and  what  was  of  so  much  importance 
in  His  great  scheme. 

But  more  than  this — God's  plan  included  the  free 
choices  and  acts  of  men.  He  did  not  mean  that  there 
should  be  one  class  of  activities  in  the  universe,  and  that 
the  most  important,  beyond  his  knowledge  and  control. 
As  His  omniscience  worked  out  the  problem  of  necessity 
before  He  formed  his  plan  (if  we  may  be  allowed  to  speak 
of  a  before  and  after  in  the  eternal  thought  of  God),  so  it 
worked  out  the  problem  of  freedom.  He  knew  how  each 
man  would  use  his  freedom,  under  all  the  possible  con- 
ditions of  life,  before  He  determined  to  create  the  man 
and  to  put  him  into  those  circumstances.  As  memory  in 
us  goes  back  and  perceives  the  free  acts  of  our  fellow-men, 
or  as  insight  into  character,  within  certain  limits,  goes  for- 
ward and  predicts  the  future  free  acts  of  men,  so  God's 
omniscience  went  out  into  the  possibilities  of  freedom  and 
conipassed  all  the  free  acts  of  all  possible  men.  Then  He 
formed  His  plan  in  full  view  of  all  that  was  to  be.  The 
fall  of  Adam,  the  faith  of  Abraham,  the  Saviour's  stop- 
ping by  Jacob's  well,  the  crucifixion  at  the  hands  of  the 
Jews,  were  all  free  acts,  and  they  were  all  in  the  divine 
plan.  Reason  teaches  us  that  it  must  have  been  so,  and  the 
Bible  reaffirms  the  truth.  The  predictions  which  form  so 
large  an  element  in  the  Scriptures  imply  God's  foreordi- 
nation  of  the  free  acts  of  men. 

"  But,"  says  the  Arminian,  "  it  is  only  in  a  qualified 
sense  that  we  are  to  represent  God's  plan  as  extending  to 
the  free  acts  of  men.     We  admit  that  He  foreknew  them. 


THE   PLAN   OF   GOD  287 

But  He  decreed  them  only  in  so  far  as  He  foreknew  them. 
The  decree  is  conditioned  upon  the  foreknowledge."  But 
the  Arminian  fails  to  reach  the  full  truth.  It  may  be 
granted  that  the  plan  depends  in  part  upon  the  omnis- 
cience of  God.  But  omniscience  is  not  foreknowledge. 
The  plan  is  one.  How  could  God  foreknow,  until  He 
had  determined  to  create  ?  Foreknowledge  has  to  do  not 
with  possibilities  but  with  certainties.  Suppose  God  did 
know  that  Paul,  if  he  were  created  and  sent  from  Jerusa- 
lem to  Damascus  and  should  see  the  risen  Christ  and  have 
His  grace  offered  to  him,  would  of  his  own  free  choice  re- 
pent and  believe :  did  He  foreknow  that  Paul  would  freely 
repent  and  believe  until  He  had  determined  to  create  him 
and  send  him  from  Jerusalem  to  Damascus  and  offer  him 
salvation  through  Christ  ?  The  foreknowledge  is  condi- 
tioned upon  the  decree,  not  the  decree  upon  the  foreknowl- 
edge. I  repeat,  God's  plan  is  one.  He  knew  all  the  pos- 
sibilities of  His  own  action  and  of  human  freedom,  in  all 
their  complicated  connections  and  intricate  interlacings, 
and  the  world  which  He  determined  to  create  out  of  all 
the  possible  worlds  was  the  one  which  has  existed  with 
all  the  events  necessary  and  free  which  have  actually 
transpired.  God  knew  what  He  M-as  about  and  meant 
that  that  should  be  which  has  been. 

"  But,"  asks  the  Arminian  once  more,  "  is  not  this  to 
destroy  freedom  altogether  ?  Is  it  not  thus  reduced  to  a 
mere  name?  "  This  is  not  so  easy  a  question  to  answer, 
and  the  answer  which  Calvinists  have  often  given  to  it 
has  been  a  confession  of  its  justice.  If  the  doctrine  of 
freedom  which  Jonathan  Edwards  teaches,  in  his  "Treatise 
on  the  Will,"  be  true,  then  it  is  a  mere  name  and  the 
divine  decree  is  maintained  at  its  expense.  Nevertheless, 
I  think  that  an  answer  can  be  given  which  Mall  enable  us 
to  preserve  freedom  intact,  while  we  maintain  the  divine 
decree  in  its  absoluteness — not  an  answer  that  will  recon- 
cile the  Infinite  with  the  finite,  for  that  is  impossible,  but 


238  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

an  answer  which  will  meet  the  objection.  The  divine 
plan  does  not  make  the  free  act  necessary  ;  that  would  of 
course  be  a  contradiction,  it  would  be  making  it  unfree. 
It  exerts  no  efficient  influence  upon  the  human  will.  It 
rather  establishes  the  freedom  of  the  choice.  All  that  it 
does  is  to  render  it  certain  to  God,  and  there  is  in  this 
certainty  nothing  which  is  at  variance  with  libert3^ 
When  the  time  comes  for  me  to  choose,  I  am  not  the  less 
free  because  God  who  has  given  me  my  freedom  knows 
how  I  am  goino;  to  choose,  and  has  determined  to  allow 
me  to  choose  in  the  way  I  please.  I  could  do  the  opposite 
if  I  chose  to  do  it ;  only,  that  Spirit  of  God  who  besets 
us  behind  and  before  compassed  my  choice  when  I  M'as 
still  a  possibility  in  the  divine  choice,  and  God  planned 
to  let  me  have  my  way.  I  believe  that  this  is  a  sufficient 
answer  to  the  Arminian.  The  difficulty  of  reconciling  the 
Infinite  with  the  finite,  in  this  relation  of  God's  decree 
to  man's  freedom,  I  cheerfully  admit.  But  the  difficulty 
does  not  belong  to  tliose  who  hold  this  doctrine  exclu- 
sively ;  the  Arminian  has  equally  to  face  it.  The  Ar- 
minian admits  that  God  foreknows  the  free  acts  of  men, 
but  if  He  foreknows  them,  are  they  not  certain,  and  if 
they  are  certain,  how  can  they  be  fi'ee  ?  So  strongly  has 
this  difficulty  been  felt  that  a  few  theologians  of  our 
time,  who  have  been  unwilling  to  admit  the  coexistence  of 
the  divine  decree  and  human  freedom,  have  denied  the 
foreknowledge  of  God,  so  far  as  the  free  acts  of  men  are 
concerned,  thus  purchasing  peace  upon  this  point  at  the 
expense  of  God's  absoluteness,  leaving  God  in  helpless 
ignorance  as  to  how  the  history  of  His  universe  is  to  come 
out! 

IV.  But  we  must  go  still  further  into  the  discussion  of 
this  difficult  subject.  The  relation  of  the  divine  plan  to 
human  sin  is  the  subject  which  now  confronts  us.  The 
difficulties  are  certainly  great,  but  let  us  face  them  bravely 
and  serenely.     We   have  to  do  here  not  so   much  with 


THE   PLAN   OF   GOD  239 

opinions  as  with  facts,  and  facts  are  sacred  things  how- 
ever hard  it  may  be  to  explain  them.  "What  are  the 
facts?  God  is  absohite — that  is  one.  His  omniscience, 
His  decree,  and  His  foreknowledge  extend  to  all  things. 
Sin  exists — that  is  the  other.  Can  we  refrain  from  put- 
ting the  two  things  together  and  admitting  that  God 
meant  that  sin  should  exist  ? 

But  we  cannot  stop  here.  The  bare  facts  do  not  suffice. 
The  questions  are  asked,  and  most  pertinently,  "  How  can 
God  mean  that  sin  should  exist  ?  Is  not  sin  the  one 
thing  above  all  others  hateful  to  God  ?  Is  it  not  contrary 
to  His  revealed  will  ?  How  can  God  decree  that  which 
He  hates  ? "  Now  we  must  not  answer  these  questions  in 
such  a  way  as  to  impeach  the  divine  holiness.  We  affirm 
with  the  strongest  emphasis  God's  opposition  to  all  sin. 
He  is  of  purer  eyes  than  to  behold  iniquity.  His  pure 
and  holy  nature  is  utterly  contrary  to  evil.  It  is  alto- 
gether repugnant  to  Him.  From  one  end  of  the  Bible 
to  the  other  God  is  represented  as  the  stern  and  uncom- 
promising enemy  of  all  sin.  He  is  light  and  in  Him  is  no 
darkness  at  all.  Better  let  God's  absoluteness  go,  better 
think  of  Him  as  weak  and  ignorant  and  finite,  than  to 
allow  a  single  spot,  however  small,  to  rest  upon  His  per- 
fect holiness. 

How,  then,  shall  we  answer  the  questions  just  referred 
to  ?  By  distinguishing,  as  theologians  in  all  the  Christian 
ages  have  done,  between  the  efficient  and  permissive  de- 
crees of  God.  There  are  some  things  which  God  means 
to  have  come  to  pass  because  He  intends  by  His  own 
efficiency  to  bring  them  to  pass.  There  are  other  things 
which  He  means  to  have  come  to  pass  only  as  allowing 
others  to  bring  them  to  pass.  Human  sin  belongs  to  the 
latter  category.  When  we  say  that  God  decrees  it  we 
mean  that  He  determines  not  to  prevent  it,  to  permit 
human  freedom  to  have  its  way  in  that  which  is  contrary 
to  the  divine  command.     He  does  not  thus  approve  of  it 


240  PEESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

or  in  the  least  abate  His  utter  opposition  to  it,  but  for 
wise  reasons  He  determines  to  allow  it.  You  ask,  "  Is  it 
not  contrary  to  His  will  ?  "  I  reply  that  the  term  will  is 
ambiguous  ;  it  may  mean  God's  decree,  it  may  mean  His 
desire  and  command.  Sin  is  contrary  to  God's  will  in 
the  latter  sense  ;  it  is  not  contrary  to  His  will  in  the 
former  sense.  We  sometimes  let  our  children  do  wrong, 
because  we  think  it  wiser  not  to  prevent  them,  better  to 
let  them  suffer  the  consequences,  while  all  the  while  our 
command  and  our  desire  are  against  it.  In  such  a  case 
we  have  like  God  a  decretive  and  a  jpreceptive  will,  a  will 
that  is  carried  out  and  a  will  that  is  frustrated. 

"But,"  it  is  asked  once  more,  "why  put  the  sin  into 
the  divine  plan  ?  Is  it  not  enough  to  say  that  God  could 
not  prevent  it  ?  Do  we  not  sufficiently  explain  the  sin 
when  we  attribute  it  to  its  true  cause,  the  free-will  of 
man  ? "  This  would  be  to  deal  with  the  matter  far  too 
superficially.  God  could  have  prevented  it,  if  He  had 
seen  fit  so  to  do.  Granting  that  He  could  not  make  a 
man  free  and  not  free  at  the  same  time,  so  that  freedom 
is  always  capable  of  abuse;  yet  He  might,  had  He  chosen 
so  to  do,  have  refrained  from  creating  the  beings  who  sin ; 
He  might  have  made  them  Mdthout  freedom;  He  might 
have  placed  them  in  circumstances  in  which  there  was  no 
temptation  to  the  sin.  Take  the  case  of  Adam.  God 
might  have  made  no  Adam,  and  there  would  have  been 
no  fall.  He  might  have  kept  tlie  tempter  out  of  the 
j^trarden. 

SlOi  veover,  on  the  assumption  that  the  permission  of  sin 
does  not  fofni-  a  part  of  God's  plan,  what  a  world  we  have ! 
There  is  no  dou  bt  that  sin  is  the  most  important  of  all 
facts  in  the  worldJ  It  is  the  awful  reality,  which  no  man 
in  his  senses  can  dt^ny.  And  yet  are  we  to  suppose  that 
it  has  come  in  spite  a^f  God,  and  that  He  did  not  mean  it 
to  be  so?  Did  the  lJ)evil  and  Adam  make  it  a  different 
world  from  what  Godi  intended  ?     Do  not,  I  beseech  you. 


THE   PLAN    OF    GOD  241 

answer  yes,  because  yon  want  to  have  it  so.  Face  tlie 
facts.  You  purchase  relief  from  oue  class  of  difficulties 
at  a  price  too  tremendous.  You  leave  God  no  longer  on 
the  throne  but  put  Him  in  a  position  where  any  of  His 
subjects  can  get  the  better  of  Plira.  However  great  the 
difficulties  in  such  a  view,  leave  the  reins  in  God's  hands. 
The  holy  God,  for  wise  reasons,  has  determined  from  the 
first  to  permit  all  the  sin  which  has  taken  place,  not  be- 
cause He  did  not  hate  it,  not  because  He  could  not  have 
prevented  it,  but  because  on  the  whole  He  thought  it  best 
to  permit  it.  The  presumptuous  sinner  who  thinks  He 
has  got  the  better  of  God  is  utterly  mistaken.  God  in 
the  solemn  stillness  of  eternity  thought  upon  that  sin  ; 
He  determined  to  allow  it ;  He  has  provided  for  it  in 
His  plan,  for  its  thwarting  and  its  punishment.  The  poor 
foolish  sinner  in  the  abuse  of  his  freedom  cannot  escape 
from  God.  The  great  and  glorious  plan  of  God  goes 
steadily  forward  to  its  accomplishment,  in  spite  of  the 
sinner's  rebellion  and  even  by  means  of  it. 

Y.  And  thus  we  are  brought  into  the  central  and  inmost 
difficulty  of  this  great  subject  :  Why  did  God  see  fit  to 
make  the  permission  of  sin  a  part  of  His  plan  ?  What 
were  His  wise  reasons?  How  shall  we  vindicate  God's 
wisdom  in  the  permission  of  sin  ?  It  is  the  problem  of  the 
Theodicy.  Let  us  face  this,  too,  not  with  the  hope  of 
doing  what  no  man  has  ever  done,  that  is  of  solving  the 
problem,  but  that  we  may  discover  how  far  our  present 
finite  knowledge  allows  us  to  go  in  the  direction  of  a 
solution. 

But  first,  let  me  say  that  this  problem  is  not  confined  to 
any  one  system  of  theology,  or  even  of  religion.  Sin  ex- 
ists, and  every  thinking  man  must  give  some  explanation 
of  it.  If  there  be  a  God,  His  relation  to  it  must  be  ex- 
plained. Every  theology  and  every  philosophy  finds  itself 
sooner  or  later  compelled  to  essay  the  task.  Heathenism 
has  generally  found  relief  in  ascribing  evil  to  the  nature 
16 


242  PKESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

of  tilings.  Its  gods  are  themselves  unholy.  Or  the  iini- 
vei'se  is  divided  between  a  principle  of  good  and  a  princi- 
ple of  evil.  Or,  as  Buddhism  conceives  it,  sin  and  evil  are 
inherent  in  existence  and  annihilation  is  the  only  good. 
Pliilosophj  has  sought  relief  in  the  denial  of  the  evil  of 
sin,  attributing  it  to  the  finiteness  of  man  or  regarding  it 
as  a  necessary  but  temporary  stage  in  his  development, 
Christianity  alone  has  furnished  an  explanation  that  can 
be  said  to  have  at  all  met  the  difficulty. 

The  typical  Chi'istian  treatment  of  the  subject  is  found 
in  the  famous  Thcodicee  of  Leibnitz.  According  to  this 
great  philosopher,  God  had  before  His  eternal  thought  all 
possible  systems — systems  without  evil  either  natural  or 
moral,  and  systems  with  evil  of  both  kinds  in  every  possi- 
ble proportion  and  combination.  He  chose  the  system 
under  which  we  live,  the  universe  which  He  actually  cre- 
ated, because  it  was  the  best.  The  sin  and  the  natural 
evil  inherent  in  it  are  the  necessary  means  of  the  greatest 
good.  This  "  Optimism"  of  Leibnitz  was  accepted  and  fur- 
ther developed  by  the  Xew  England  theologians,  Edwards, 
Hopkins,  Bellamy,  and  their  compeers.  They  silenced  ob- 
jectors by  asking  whether  God  might,  if  He  would,  have 
formed  a  wiser  plan  and  created  a  better  world.  If  a 
world  with  no  sin  in  it  would  have  been  better,  why  did 
not  God  choose  it  ?  This  theodicy,  which  has  otherwise 
much  to  commend  it,  was  deprived  of  real  value  by  the 
doctrine  of  the  will  held  by  both  Leibnitz  and  the  New 
England  theologians.  They  taught  a  determinism  which 
reduced  freedom  to  a  mere  name  and  made  God  to  all  in- 
tents and  purposes  the  Author  of  sin.  The  distinction 
between  the  permissive  and  efficient  decrees  of  God, 
while  in  terms  i-etained,  was  practically  abandoned.  Men 
were  what  God  has  determined  they  should  be,  some 
saved,  to  the  glory  of  His  grace,  some  lost,  to  the  glory  of 
His  justice. 

The  theodicy  of  Leibnitz  emphasized   the  divine  effi- 


THE   PLAN   OF   GOD  243 

ciency  to  the  extent  of  obscuring,  if  not  of  ignoring,  hu- 
man freedom.  It  was  natural  that  theories  should  arise 
in  which  the  human  factor  in  the  great  problem  should  be 
emphasized.  One  of  the  most  notable  of  these  was  that 
advanced  by  Dr.  N.  W.  Taylor,  of  New  Haven.  He  did 
not  put  his  theodicy  into  the  form  of  a  positive  assertion, 
but  modestly  affirmed,  that  "it  may  be  impossible  that 
God  should  exclude  all  moral  evil  from  a  moral  system, 
and  of  course  from  the  best  moral  system,"  God  might, 
had  He  desired  to  do  so,  have  chosen  a  system  in  which 
human  freedom  had  no  place,  but  having  chosen  a  system 
involving  freedom,  it  might  be  that  He  could  not  prevent 
all  sin  in  it.  Sin  might  be  necessarily  incidental  to  a 
moral  system.  Even  God  cannot  make  a  thing  to  be  and 
not  to  be  at  the  same  time,  and  it  might  be  that  God  in 
making  men  free  by  that  very  fact  made  it  certain  that  a 
certain  amount  of  sin  would  follow.  Undoubtedly  this 
view  affords  a  fitting  corrective  to  the  other.  But  it  may 
be  questioned  whether  it  does  not  go  too  far  in  its  sugges- 
tion that  God  may  not  be  able  to  prevent  all  sin  in  a 
moral  system.  Freedom  is  not  such  an  uncontrollable 
power  that  God  could  not  keep  it  in  bounds  by  moral 
means  if  He  desired  to  do  so.  God  prevents  all  sin  in 
heaven  with  no  detriment  to  freedom.  He  might  have 
established  such  a  system  as  would  have  insured  the  right 
use  of  freedom  in  every  part  of  His  universe.  The  possi- 
bility of  sin  is  essential  to  freedom,  but  not  the  actuality 
of  it.  There  are  moral  systems  and  moral  systems.  It  is 
not  a  matter  of  course  that  every  moral  system  is  the  best 
system. 

Both  these  theodicies  represent  elements  of  the  one 
truth.  We  must  hold  fast,  on  the  one  hand,  to  the  sov- 
ereignty of  God,  the  reality  of  the  divine  plan  ;  and,  on 
the  other,  to  the  reality  of  that  freedom  which  God's  plan 
has  established  and  which  He  surely  will  respect.  This  is 
the  best  system.     It  is  the  best  moral  system.     God  per- 


244  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

mitted  the  present  amount  of  sin  and  suffering  because  it 
was  wisest  to  do  so.  Looking  at  the  universe  as  a  whole, 
considering  the  ends  God  had  in  view,  it  is  a  better  uni- 
verse than  it  would  be  had  God  permitted  no  sin.  Sin 
is  man's  work  not  God's,  but  God  knew  what  He  was 
about  when  lie  determined  to  permit  a  certain  amount  of 
it  in  His  world.  He  meant  to  work  out  a  higher  manifes- 
tation of  His  love  and  a  higher  type  of  human  chai-acter 
than  would  be  possible  without  it,  in  a  word,  to  secure  a 
greater  good. 

Our  great  trouble  in  dealing  with  this  subject  is  that  we 
look  at  God's  plan  only  in  relation  to  sin,  whereas  we 
should  look  at  it  equally  in  its  relation  to  redemption. 
We  need  to  follow  Paul's  line  of  thought  in  the  fifth 
chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  in  which  he  tells  us 
that  "  where  sin  abounded  grace  did  abound  more  ex- 
ceedingly ;  that,  as  sin  reigned  in  death,  even  so  might 
grace  reign  through  righteousness  unto  eternal  life 
through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord  "  (vv.  20,  21).  Let  us  look 
at  the  world  into  which  we  are  ushered  by  birth.  It  is  a 
world  in  which  sin  and  God's  grace  aie  working  together, 
and  in  which  suffering  and  death  serve  as  checks  and  pun- 
ishments upon  sin  and  as  means  of  discipline  in  holiness. 
In  the  midst  of  these  influences  our  freedom  develops  and 
our  probation  is. passed  through.  There  are  tremendous 
risks,  but  there  are  glorious  rewards.  The  soul  that  goes 
through  the  struggle  of  sin  and  grace,  through  the  tribu- 
lations and  sufferings  of  life,  that  knows  the  love  of  Christ 
and  learns  the  lesson  of  his  cross,  and  then  passes  through 
death  into  eternal  life  has  cause  to  thank  God  that  the 
world  is  just  what  it  is.  It  can  even  borrow  Augustin's 
words,  "  O  blessed  sin  which  was  worthy  to  have  such  and 
so  great  a  Redeemer  !  "  I  can  see  how  a  theodicy  that 
gave  no  place  to  liunian  freedom  would  be  a  mockery ;  but 
if  we  can  believe  that  God  gives  to  evei-y  soul  the  power 
and  the  opportunity  to  obtain  the  salvation  which  Christ 


THE  PLAN   OF   GOD  245 

has  wrought,  tlie  case  becomes  different.  I  believe  with 
all  my  heart  that  He  does  give  to  every  soul,  whether  in 
Christian  or  heathen  lands,  both  power  and  opportunity. 
I  believe  that  the  advantages  of  the  world  in  which  we 
live  far  outweigh  its  disadvantages.  1  believe  it  is  a  bless- 
ing to  be  brought  into  such  a  world  and  to  have  a  chance 
to  win  its  glorious  prize,  and  this  not  only  in  spite  of  the 
risks,  but  even  because  of  the  risks.  And  I  believe  that 
those  who  are  finally  lost  are  lost  wholly  through  their 
own  fault,  because  they  would  not  accept  the  grace  so 
freely  offered  to  them,  and  that  for  them,  looking  at  it 
not  from  the  standpoint  of  their  failure  but  of  the  oppor- 
tunity God  gave  them,  it  was  a  blessing  that  they  were 
brought  into  the  world. 

The  story  is  told  of  old  Dr.  Beeclier,  when  he  was  a 
professor  in  Lane  Theological  Seminary,  that  he  was  one 
day  lecturing  to  his  students  upon  the  objections  to  the 
doctrine  of  free  agency.  "  He  had  compared,"  says  the 
narrator  of  the  anecdote,  "  the  tremendous  perils  and  fear- 
ful responsibilities  of  such  an  endowment  on  the  one  hand, 
with  the  glorious  privileges  and  possibilities  which  it  in- 
volved on  the  other,  w-lien  suddenly,  snatching  off  his 
spectacles,  he  drew  a  picture  of  an  assembly  of  all  God's 
intelligent  universe  summoned  into  a  quasi  state  of  exist- 
ence, in  which  they  should  be  capable  of  understanding 
the  reasons  for  and  against  being  created,  clothed  with  the 
responsibility  of  free  agency,  and  permitted  to  decide  the 
question  for  themselves.  Then,  leaping  from  his  chair, 
and  walking  back  and  forth  upon  the  platform,  he  poured 
out,  in  a  few  short,  pithy  sentences,  the  peril  of  falling 
and  the  damnation  of  hell  on  the  one  side,  and  the  bless- 
edness of  standing  and  the  possibility  of  restoration  by 
divine  love  and  the  heights  of  immortal  glory  to  be 
gained  on  the  other,  and  then,  as  if  standing  in  the  place 
of  the  Creator  Himself,  and  putting  the  question  to  vote, 
Shall  I  create  or  not  create  ?  he  made  the  shout  go  up  as 


246  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

the  voice  of  ten  tliousand  times  ten  thousand,  '  Create, 
Create ! '  " 

No  thoughtful  and  candid  Clu-istian  will  claim  that, 
when  all  is  said,  we  have  a  complete  theodicy.  We  may 
discover  in  their  great  outlines  God's  reasons  for  giving 
the  permission  of  sin  a  place  in  His  plan,  but  much  will 
still  be  left  to  faith.  Sin  is  an  awful  thing,  and  there  is 
an  awful  amount  of  sin  in  the  world.  The  earth  is  full  of 
suffering  which  seems  to  bring  no  higher  blessing.  And 
then  there  is  the  dark  mystery  of  the  future  life,  eternal 
retribution.  We  must  have  faith.  We  must  have  pa- 
tience. The  final  and  perfect  theodicy  will  not  come  till 
the  Day  of  Judgment.  Then  God  will  show  to  the  uni- 
verse the  perfect  wisdom  and  justice,  yea,  the  holy  love  of 
all  His  works.  In  the  light  of  the  end  the  divine  plan 
will  be  glorious.  When  God,  the  Builder,  has  "  made  the 
pile  complete,"  we  shall  duly  praise  God  the  Architect. 

God's  plan  originated  in  holy  love ;  it  is  carried  out  in 
holy  love  ;  it  will  be  consummated  in  holy  love.  That 
love  compasses  the  universe  about  and  enfolds  it  in  its 
embrace.  God's  hand  is  everywhere.  Xothing  is  in  vain. 
God's  eternal  purpose  was  a  purpose  of  redemption  in 
Christ  Jesus  our  Lord.  That  is  our  strength,  our  safe- 
guard, our  jo}',  our  hope. 

In  conclusion,  a  word  about  the  value  of  this  doctrine. 
It  is  not  one  of  the  essential  ones.  Those  who  are  unwill- 
ing to  accept  it  may  be  in  all  essentials  as  good  Christians 
as  those  who  make  most  of  it.  It  has,  however,  its  very 
great  importance.  As  I  said  at  the  beginning  of  this  chap- 
ter, it  makes  strong  Christians.  There  are  times  in  the 
life  of  the  individual,  and  nations,  and  the  race,  when  evil 
seems  to  get  the  upper  hand  in  the  world.  The  devil 
seems  to  have  gotten  the  better  of  God.  The  cause  of  ho- 
liness and  truth  suffers.  Then  we  fall  back  on  the  eternal 
plan  of  God.  He  has  known  all  this  from  the  beginning. 
He  has  the  reins  in  His  hands  and  will  not  let  them  go. 


THE  PLAN   OF   GOD  247 

He  will  cause  the  wrath  of  man  to  praise  Ilim,  and  re- 
strain the  remainder  of  wrath.  Behind  this  strife  and 
turmoil,  this  vacillation  and  doubtfulness  of  the  struggle, 
is  the  eternal  plan  of  the  eternal  God.  J!^o  one  can  thwart 
Him.  We  are  free,  but  He  is  sure.  His  will  will  be  done. 
Especially  are  we  never  to  forget  that  redemption  is  the 
central  fact  in  the  plan.  This  is  God's  great  end  in  His 
dealings  with  the  world.  He  will  carry  it  through.  The 
universe  is  to  be  one  in  Christ  the  Saviour. 


XIV. 

CREATION 

God  lias  carried  Ilis  eternal  plan  into  execution  by  His 
three  great  "works" — as  the  theologians  call  tlieni — of 
Ci"eation,  Providence,  and  Redemption.  In  the  present 
chapter  we  shall  discuss  the  first  of  these.  The  cosmog- 
ony or  story  of  creation,  at  once  a  history  and  a  poem, 
contained  in  the  first  and  second  chapters  of  Genesis  is 
the  chief  source  from  which  the  Christian  doctrine  is  de- 
rived. The  truths  here  asserted  are  taken  for  granted 
elsewhere  in  the  Bible.  It  is  only  in  the  New  Testament 
teachings  respecting  the  relation  of  creation  to  the  person 
of  the  Saviour  and  redemption  through  him  that  any  ad- 
vance is  made  in  the  later  Scriptures  upon  the  simple 
foundation  doctrine  of  this  Prologue  to  the  Word  of  God. 

I.  The  Biblical  cosmogony  does  not  stand  alone.  Al- 
most all  the  ethnic  religions  of  the  past  and  the  present 
liave  also  their  stories  of  creation.  In  their  more  impor- 
tant features  these  cosmogonies  have  a  common  likeness. 
They  all  go  back  to  a  time  when  the  things  which  now 
surround  us  were  non-existent.  They  show  how  by  suc- 
cessive stages  the  heaven  and  the  earth  and  all  the  varied 
forms  of  the  univei'se  came  into  being.  Some  of  them 
are  very  beautiful  and  suggestive.  We  are  all  familiar 
with  the  Greek  myth  of  creation  which  Ilesiod  has  pre- 
served— how  at  first  there  were  only  Chaos  and  Eros,  oi- 
Love,  how  under  the  influence  of  the  latter,  as  the  princi- 
ple of  order  and  harmon}'.  Chaos  was  divided  into  Tar- 
tarus and  Earth  and  the  Earth  e-ave  birth  to  the  Heaven 


CKEATION  249 

and  the  Sea,  how — still  under  the  influence  of  Eros — the 
Heaven  and  the  Earth  pi-oduced  the  Titans  and  the  Cy- 
clops, how  the  Titan  Chronos  begat  Zeus  and  the  gods, 
and  how  at  last  the  race  of  men  sprang  from  the  soil.  One 
of  the  most  interesting  cosmogonies,  which  stands  in  close 
relation  to  the  Biblical,  is  the  Chaldsean  Genesis  which 
George  Smith  deciphered  frojn  some  broken  clay  tablets 
discovered  at  Nineveh  and  now  in  the  British  Museum 
(see  Smith's  "Chaldsean  Account  of  Genesis,"  p.  62;  cf. 
"Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  ix.,  p.  115  seq.).  "When 
above  were  not  raised  the  heavens,"  this  account  begins, 
"  and  below  on  the  earth  a  plant  had  not  gi-own  up  ;  the 
abyss  also  had  not  broken  up  their  boundaries  ;  the  chaos 
(or  water)  Tiamat  (the  sea)  was  the  pioducing  mother  of 
the  whole  of  them."  Then  it  goes  on  to  describe  the 
creation  of  the  great  gods,  the  separation  of  the  sea  and 
the  land,  the  creation  of  the  heavenly  bodies,  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  seasons  and  the  creation  of  the  beasts. 

The  Scriptural  account  of  creation  bears  in  many  re- 
spects a  close  resemblance  to  these  heathen  cosmogonies. 
Bat  as  soon  as  we  begin  to  examine  it  carefully  we  find 
that  it  is  marked  by  great  and  essential  diiferences.  The 
Bible  alone  gives  us  the  pure  theistic  conception  of  God, 
as  the  absolute  Being,  the  self-existent  Creator.  The  hea- 
then traditions  are  all  vitiated  by  some  radically  wrong 
conception  of  God  and  of  His  relation  to  the  world. 
Emanistic,  pantheistic,  or  dualistic  elements  are  present  in 
almost  all  of  them.  Generally  the  starting-point  of  crea- 
tion is  the  chaos,  out  of  which  all  things  come.  The 
gods  themselves  are  created,  so  that  the  cosmogonies  are 
theogonies  as  well.  But  the  account  of  Genesis  puts  first 
the  self -existent  God.  The  universe  is  due  to  His  fiat. 
There  is  no  pre-existent  material  and  no  blind  process  of 
development.  The  chaos  is  itself  of  His  making  and  His 
Spirit 

"  Dove-like  sits  brooding  on  the  vast  abyss." 


250  PRESENT  BAY  THEOLOGY 

From  the  first,  God  is  represented  as  freely  creating  by 
tlie  word  of  His  power. 

We  have  here  a  fact  which  can  only  be  explained  by 
the  assumption  that  this  wonderful  cosmogony  of  Genesis 
is  the  result  of  divine  revelation  and  inspiration.  Where 
it  originally  came  from  we  do  not  know.  Undoubtedly  it 
antedates  the  book  of  Genesis  in  its  present  form.  Not 
unlikely  it  is  the  substance  of  a  primitive  tradition  handed 
down  orally  from  generation  to  generation.  The  heathen 
cosmogonies  may  be  perverted  forms  of  the  same  tradi- 
tion. But  whatever  be  the  origin  of  the  Biblical  cosmog- 
ony, it  bears  the  evidence  of  its  truth  upon  it  and  shines 
in  its  own  light,  which  is  a  divine  light.  Its  truth,  as  it 
is  set  off  by  the  dark  background  of  the  heathen  traditions, 
shows  it  to  be  from  God.  The  religious  thought  of  man 
has  not  in  its  highest  flights  gone  beyond  the  doctrine  of 
this  first  chapter  of  the  Bible. 

II.  But  the  Scriptural  account  of  creation  does  not  come 
into  competition  with  the  heathen  cosmogonies  alone. 
There  is  also  a  scientific  cosmogony.  Physical  science  does 
not,  indeed,  attempt  to  account  for  the  origin  of  the  uni- 
verse, but  it  does  carry  us  back  to  a  time  when  only  the 
primitive  elements  existed,  and  discloses  to  us  the  processes 
and  the  order  in  which  the  present  inorganic  and  organic 
forms  have  come  into  being.  Astronomy,  geology,  and 
the  other  physical  sciences  furnish  us  with  a  natural  his- 
tory of  the  universe,  the  substantial  truth  of  which  we 
cannot  doubt. 

Does  the  Scriptural  cosmogony  agree  with  the  scien- 
tific ?  The  question  is  asked  by  each  new  generation,  as 
the  discoveries  of  physical  science  enlarge  our  knowledge 
of  the  past.  Do  the  Book  of  Revelation  and  the  Book  of 
Nature  coincide  ? 

The  question  is  one  of  fact  rather  than  of  theory,  and 
it  is  not  so  easy  to  answer  as  might  at  first  appear.  The 
Bible  is  not  a  scientific  treatise.     It  was  given  us  for  pur- 


CREATION  251 

poses  wliollj  religions,  as  Cardinal  Baronius  said,  "  to 
teach  ns  how  to  go  to  heaven,  and  not  how  the  heavens 
go "  (Lenormant,  "  Beginnings  of  History,"  Am.  trans., 
Pref.,  p.  x).  We  cannot,  without  further  ado,  make  out  two 
schemes,  the  one  representing  the  facts  of  revelation  and 
the  otiier  those  of  science,  and  place  the  two  side  by  side. 
The  Bible  and  the  physical  sciences  do,  indeed,  in  the  case 
before  us,  deal  with  the  same  subject,  but  they  approach 
it  from  wholly  different  directions,  deal  with  it  in  an  alto- 
gether different  way,  and  aim  at  totally  different  ends. 
The  selection,  arrangement,  and  treatment  of  the  facts  are 
determined  by  the  difference  of  motive. 

Physical  science,  when  it  deals  with  the  past  history  of 
the  universe,  is  concerned  wholly  with  second  causes.  It 
traces  out,  so  far  as  the  means  at  its  disposal  permit,  each 
link  in  the  long  chain  of  the  world's  development.  It 
aims  at  completeness  of  detail,  at  the  discovery  of  the 
genetic  relations,  at  chronological  order.  It  divides  the 
past  into  ages  and  periods,  and  endeavors  to  fill  each  with 
its  proper  contents,  desci'ibing  the  physical  conditions,  and, 
when  life  has  appeared,  the  flora  and  fauna.  Exactitude 
is  its  great  end.  Facts  are  of  more  value  to  it  than  ideas. 
As  we  have  seen,  it  confesses  its  incompetence  to  ac- 
count for  the  origin  of  the  universe.  So  it  does  not 
trouble  itself  with  questions  about  the  dependence  of 
things.  If  there  are  spiritual  beings  higher  than  man,  it 
has  nothing  to  do  with  them.  It  admits  the  presence  of 
final  causes  in  nature  only  grudgingly.  It  enters  into  no 
discussion  of  the  spiritual  and  religious  relations  of  things. 
I  may  be  sure  that  geology  will  give  me  the  history  of  the 
past  in  a  scheme  in  which  every  discovered  fact  has  a 
place,  and  in  which  the  order  of  causal  dependence  and 
time  is  rigidlj^  followed. 

Not  so  the  Bible.  It  is  essentially  a  religious  Book.  It 
is  only  incidentally,  if  at  all,  that  it  touches  upon  the  sub- 
jects with  which  science  is  concerned,  and  when  it  does 


252  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

SO  its  motive  is  religious.  It  deals  with  God  and  divine 
things,  and  it  treats  the  history  of  the  world's  past  only  as 
it  stands  related  to  God.  There  is  no  reason  to  believe 
that  the  sacred  writers  ever  turn  aside  to  teach  their 
readers  the  facts  of  science  or  philosophy.  Its  object  is 
redemption.  The  Fall  has  not  rendered  men  incompetent 
to  discover  scientific  or  philosophical  truth,  and  revelation 
affords  no  royal  road  to  such  knowledge.  It  is  the  moral 
and  spiritual  darkness  of  man's  soul  which  the  Scriptm-es 
aim  to  enlighten.  It  is  true  that  all  truth,  spiritual,  moral, 
and  intellectual,  is  one,  and  the  light  which  the  Bible 
gives  upon  religious  subjects  often  illumines  to  a  greater 
or  less  extent  the  other  spheres  of  knowledge.  But,  ex- 
cept so  far  as  this  is  the  case,  the  Scriptural  writers  in  all 
matters  of  merely  human  knowledge  share  the  limitations 
of  their  contemporaries.  All  those  popular  misconcep- 
tions of  the  facts  of  nature  which  belong  to  the  unscien- 
tific mind,  and  which  niodern  science  is  only  slowly  over- 
coming, are  to  be  found  in  the  Bible — not  indeed  in  its 
teachings,  but  in  its  modes  of  thought  and  expression. 
This  is  one  of  the  facts  which  give  the  Bible  its  great 
value  as  a  book  intended  for  common  men. 

The  cosmogony  of  Genesis  corresponds  to  the  general 
character  of  the  Bible.  The  ends  it  contemplates  are 
wholly  religious.  It  aims  to  describe  the  beginnings  of 
the  world,  so  far  as  they  are  necessary  to  the  understand- 
ing of  redemption  or  the  establishment  of  God's  kingdom, 
which  is  the  great  subject  of  the  Bible.  Thus  it  shows 
that  the  God  of  creation,  who  is  also  the  God  of  redemp- 
tion, is  the  personal  God.  It  tells  us  that  the  universe  is 
due  to  His  free  self-determination  and  in  no  sense  the  re- 
sult of  necessity.  It  points  out  to  us  the  fact  that  crea- 
tion advanced  throuirh  successive  stages  to  its  culmination 
in  man,  created  in  the  divine  image  and  the  subject  of 
God's  kingdom.  In  opposition  to  all  theories  of  the  uni- 
verse which  would  make  God  in  any  sense  the  author  of 


CREATION  253 

evil,  it  solemnly  declares,  as  each  cycle  of  creation  is  com- 
pleted, "  And  God  saw  that  it  was  good,"  concluding  the 
whole  account  with  the  words,  "  And  God  saw  everything 
that  He  had  made,  and  behold,  it  was  very  good."  Thus 
the  way  was  opened  for  the  narrative  of  the  introduction 
of  sin  into  the  world  by  the  abuse  of  human  freedom. 
Finally,  it  shows  how  in  God's  creative  activitj^,  and  His 
rest  at  its  close,  the  foundation  was  laid  for  the  institution 
of  the  Sabbath,  which  was  destined  to  be  of  such  untold 
importance  in  the  religious  history  of  mankind. 

These  are  the  great  ends  at  which  the  cosmogony  of 
Genesis  aimed,  and  which  determined  the  selection  and 
arrangement  of  the  facts.  It  would  not  be  strange  if  the 
result  were  a  very  different  arrangement  from  that  which 
the  scientific  cosmogony  gives.  Such  a  result  would  not 
in  any  way  impugn  the  truth  of  the  account  as  a  part  of 
the  divine  revelation  or  throw  any  discredit  upon  the  in- 
spiration of  its  author.  The  chronological  order  might  be 
only  the  framework  for  an  arrangement  that  was  largely 
topical.  But,  as  I  have  already  said,  the  question  is  not 
so  much  of  theory  as  of  fact.  What  do  the  facts  show, 
agreement  or  disagreement?  In  reply,  I  must  confess 
that  I  do  not  find  such  absolute  agreement  as  is  claimed 
to  exist  by  some  of  the  more  zealous  harmonists.  There 
is  not  the  slightest  evidence  that  the  author  of  the  cos- 
mogony knew  anything  about  the  N^ebular  Hypothesis, 
and  considering  the  discredit  into  which  that  hypothesis 
has  fallen  among  men  of  science  in  our  own  time,  we 
need  not  regret  that  this  is  the  case.  Neither  do  I  see  any 
reason  to  believe  that  he  knew  anything  about  the  pro- 
cesses by  which  our  globe  passed  from  the  gaseous  to  the 
molten  state,  and  from  the  molten  to  the  solid,  and  by 
which  the  present  relations  of  earth  and  atmosphere  were 
established.  It  would  be  going  quite  too  far  to  assert  that 
he  had  any  acquaintance  with  the  sciences  of  botany  and 
zoology  and  their  principles  of   classification.     Whoever 


254  PKESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

the  author  of  this  marvellous  cosmogony  was,  and  from 
whatever  sources,  under  the  guidance  of  the  divine  Spirit, 
he  derived  his  knowledge  of  the  universe,  there  is  nothing 
to  show  that  he  was  vouchsafed  any  prophetic  anticipations 
of  the  discoveries  of  modern  science. 

Nevertheless,  when  these  qualifications  are  made,  it 
seems  to  me  that  there  remains  a  very  remarkable  agree- 
ment between  the  two  cosmogonies.  So  far  as  the  par- 
ticular purposes  and  the  peculiar  limitations  of  the  two 
points  of  view  permit,  the  cosmogony  of  revelation  and 
the  cosmogony  of  physical  science  correspond.  It  is  evi- 
dent that  we  have  before  us  the  same  facts,  though  beheld 
in  different  lights  and  from  a  different  angle.  This  seems 
to  be  one  of  the  cases  which  shows  how  the  light  of  revela- 
tion in  spiritual  things  can  throw  a  real  though  shadowed 
illnmination  upon  other  fields  of  knowledge.  The  best 
modern  Hebrew  exegesis  admits  that  the  days  of  Gene- 
sis were  not  literal  days  of  twenty-four  hours  each,  but 
day-periods,  of  indefinite  duration.  Like  God's  Sabbath, 
which  according  to  our  Saviour  has  continued  since  the 
conclusion  of  creation  (John  v.  IT),  His  creative  days  wei'e 
aeons.  Within  the  framework  of  the  Hexaemeron,  or 
six-days'  work,  the  Biblical  cosmogony  presents  a  num- 
ber of  facts  in  which  it  shows  itself  in  striking  accord  with 
the  teachings  of  science.  It  places  first  in  the  activities 
of  the  universe  the  production  of  light,  making  it  precede 
the  creation  of  the  heavenly  bodies.  The  creation  which 
it  describes  involves  a  long  process,  running  through  suc- 
cessive ages,  with  intervening  periods  of  natural  develop- 
ment. It  sets  forth  the  true  order  of  evolution,  the  inor- 
ganic world,  vegetable  life,  the  lower  and  higher  animals 
and  man.  It  connects  man,  so  far  as  his  lower  nature  is 
concerned,  with  the  material  world,  while  it  refers  his  in- 
tellectual and  spiritual  powers  to  the  direct  inbreathing  of 
the  divine  Spirit.  The  differences  in  detail  between  the 
two  cosmogonies  become  insignificant,  when   we  take  into 


CREATION  255 

account  the  different  objects  contemplated  and  the  neces- 
sary limitations  of  the  two  standpoints.  The  over-zealous 
harmonist,  who  will  press  every  detail  into  exact  corre- 
spondence, lays  himself  open  to  the  sneer  of  the  sceptic. 
But  the  sober-minded  theologian,  careful  to  discriminate 
between  the  things  that  diffei",  and  ready  to  admit  all  real 
divergencies,  can  show,  over  and  above  the  minor  differ- 
ences, an  agreement  which  can  only  be  explained  upon 
the  assumption  that  this  primitive  story  of  creation  is  the 
simple  truth,  and  therefore  in  essential  hai-monj^  with  the 
truth  as  brought  to  light  by  the  investigations  of  physical 
science. 

It  remains,  before  leaving  this  branch  of  our  subject,  to 
speak  briefly  of  the  relation  of  the  Biblical  cosmogony  to 
the  scientific  theory  of  evolution.  I  say,  the  scientific  the- 
ory, for  there  is  a  philosophical  theory  of  evolution  which 
is  in  principle  irreconcilable  with  theism,  and  of  course 
with  the  account  of  creation  in  Genesis,  and  of  which, 
therefore,  it  is  needless  for  me  to  speak  here.  The  scien- 
tific theory  does  not  attempt  to  account  for  everything.  It 
is  a  hypothesis  which  has  proved  valuable  for  the  explana- 
tion of  extensive  tracts  in  the  realm  of  nature,  especially  in 
the  organic  sphere,  but  which  is  far  from  claiming  to  ex- 
plain the  origin  of  the  universe,  or  to  bridge  over  all  the 
gaps  in  its  history.  Now,  the  statements  of  the  first 
chapter  of  Genesis  leave  abundant  room  for  the  application 
of  any  moderate  and  really  scientific  theory  of  evolution. 
The  Hexaemeron,  with  its  steady  progress  forward  and  u]d- 
ward,  and  its  confinement  of  God's  creative  activity  to 
the  introduction  of  the  fundamental  forms  of  finite  ex- 
istence, almost  seems  to  have  been  arranged  so  as  to  ad- 
mit within  its  framework  the  operation  of  such  a  law  as 
that  of  evolution.  Evolution,  rightly  understood,  is 
simply  the  method  of  God's  providence  in  the  physical 
world.  It  is  in  no  way  opposed  to  the  creative  action  of 
God.     The  latter  is  the  necessary  condition  of  the  former  ; 


256  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

the  former  is  the  carrying  out  and  fulfihnent  of  the 
latter.  As  in  the  redemptive  revelation  the  snpernatnral 
and  the  natural  were  combined,  new  elements  introduced 
by  means  of  inspiration  and  miracle,  and  then  these  new 
elements  themselves  followed  the  course  of  ordinary  his- 
torical development,  so  in  the  progress  of  the  world's 
primitive  history  God  at  certain  epochs  introduced  new 
forms  of  existence  by  His  creative  efficiency,  and  these 
forms  thereupon  entered  into  the  course  of  evolution 
under  the  ordinary  operations  of  natural  law.  In  both 
alike  the  power  of  God  is  operative. 

III.  We  have  now  come  to  the  point  where  we  must 
look  more  closely  into  the  nature  of  creation.  What  is 
creation  ?  The  word  has  often  been  abused  and  made  to 
do  duty  for  conceptions  altogether  foreign  to  it.  Thus  it 
has  been  said  that  God's  preserving  providence  is  a  con- 
tinual creation,  with  the  result  of  confusing  two  ideas  that 
are  wholly  distinct.  So  theologians  have  spoken  of  an 
eternal  creation,  or  have  explained  it  as  the  moulding  and 
shaping  of  a  pre-existent  material.  But,  in  spite  of  these 
erroneous  interpretations,  the  meaning  of  the  word  crea- 
tion, as  used  in  the  Scriptures,  and  in  the  language  of  com- 
mon life — which  in  this  case  perfectly  agrees  with  the 
teachings  of  sound  theological  science — is  perfectly  clear. 
Creation  is  a  new  beginning.  It  implies  that  something 
has  been  brought  into  existence  that  did  not  previously 
exist.  God  is  the  absolute  First  Cause.  Finite  things 
have  not  had  an  eternal  being,  as  He  has  had.  Mattel', 
energy,  life,  spirit,  are  not  self -existent.  Tliere  was  a  time 
when  they  began  to  be. 

Theology  affirms  that  creation  is  "  out  of  nothing.'' 
This  definition  is  a  stumbling-block  to  manj^,  but  it  seems 
to  be  essential,  rightly  understood,  to  the  theistic,  and  so 
to  the  Christian,  doctrine  of  creation.  It  denies  that  there 
is  any  eternal  substance  outside  of  God,  like  the  unformed 
substance,  the  hjle  amor_pJios  of  the  Platonic  philosophy. 


CREATION  257 

out  of  wliich  God  has  shaped  all  things.  It  also  denies 
that  God  has  made  things  out  of  His  own  essence,  or  that 
they  are  in  any  sense  an  emanation  from  Him.  Its  mean- 
ing is  simply  that  which  has  jnst  been  assigned  to  the 
woi-d  creation  :  God  has  called  into  being  something  that 
did  not  before  exist.  "God  said,  Let  there  be  light ;  and 
light  was."  The  nothing  of  which  we  speak  is  not  viewed 
as  a  kind  of  material  out  of  which  things  have  been  made. 
The  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  clearly  expi-esses 
the  idea  of  creation  out  of  nothing,  when  he  says,  "  By 
faith  we  understand  that  the  worlds  have  been  framed  by 
the  word  of  God,  so  that  what  is  seen  hath  not  been  made 
out  of  things  which  do  appear"  (Heb.  xi,  3).  The  objec- 
tion has  been  raised  that  creation  out  of  nothing  implies 
an  effect  without  a  cause — exnihilo  nihil  Jit^  out  of  nothing 
nothing  is  made.  But  no  mistake  could  be  greater  than 
that  which  this  objection  implies.  We  ascribe  the  effect 
to  the  greatest  and  most  potent  of  all  causes,  the  will  of 
the  absolute  Being  Himself.  The  maxim  that  nothing 
comes  out  of  nothing  has  no  application  at  all  to  creation. 
It  belongs  wholly  to  the  realm  of  created  things,  and  has  to 
do,  not  with  the  operations  of  the  First  Cause,  but  entirely 
with  second  causes.  It  is  simply  another  statement  of  the 
principle  of  finite  causation,  or  of  the  scientific  law  of  the 
conservation  of  matter  and  energy.  All  that  it  affirms  is, 
that  in  the  world  as  now  constituted  every  finite  effect 
must  have  a  finite  cause.  It  tells  us  absolutely  nothing 
about  the  origination  of  the  universe.  That  can  only  be  ex- 
plained through  the  free  determination  of  an  infinite  Will. 
Can  we  form  any  conception  of  creation  ?  Certainly 
not  any  adequate  conception.  Creation  is  unique  ;  we  can 
find  nothing  like  it  in  the  whole  range  of  our  knowledge. 
It  is  the  infinite  act  of  an  infinite  Being,  a  way  that  is 
higher  than  our  ways,  and  that  springs  from  a  thought 
that  is  higher  than  our  thoughts.  No  man  ever  saw  it, 
and  no  man  could  understand  it  if  he  did.  It  could  not 
17 


258  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

be  perceived  tlirongh  tlie  senses.  It  is  impossible  to  pict- 
ure it  to  the  imagination.  Suppose  jou  or  I  had  been 
present — if  such  an  anachronism  be  supposable — when 
God  created  life,  what  should  we  have  seen  ?  IS^othing. 
Before  the  creative  act  there  would  have  been  inorganic 
matter,  afterward  protoplasm  ;  but  we  should  not  have 
known  that  life  was  there  until  it  began  to  produce  its 
effects.  God's  creation  is  not  an  act  which  comes  with 
the  tempest,  the  earthquake,  or  the  fire,  but  with  the  still 
small  voice.  Like  the  miracle,  which  is  also  an  infinite 
act  of  the  infinite  Being,  a  direct  manifestation  of  the 
First  Cause,  creation  is  invisible.  When  Christ  multiplied 
the  loaves  and  fishes  so  as  to  feed  the  five  thousand,  who 
of  all  the  multitude  beheld  the  process  ?  Before  there 
were  five  loaves  and  two  small  fishes,  afterward  the 
loaves  and  fishes  multiplied  a  thousand-fold.  Do  you 
imagine  anyone  stole  the  secret  of  that  miracle  ?  Did 
anyone  see  the  water  change  into  wine  ?  It  is  of  the  very 
nature  of  a  miracle  thus  to  elude  all  observation  and  in 
this  sense  to  be  incomprehensible,  and  creation  is  like  it  in 
these  respects.  And  yet,  while  I  would  thus  strongly 
emphasize  the  element  of  mystery  in  creation,  it  seems  to 
me  that  we  may  find  some  analogies  in  the  sphere  of  our 
experience  which  will  throw  a  little  light  upon  its  nature. 
God  has  created  man  in  His  own  image,  and  the  Infinite 
is  mirrored  in  the  human  soul  as  in  no  other  form  of 
natural  existence.  It  is  to  our  own  spirits  that  we  go 
when  we  wish  to  gain  the  highest  knowledge  of  which  we 
are  capable  respecting  the  nature  and  activities  of  the  di- 
vine Spirit.*  Now,  there  are  at  least  two  operations  of  the 
human  soul  which  may  be  compared,  though  so  much 
lower,  with  the  creative  acts  of  God,  and  it  is  interesting 
to  note  that  a  recognition  of  this  fact  has  led  men  to  call 
both  of  these  classes  of  operations  creative.  The  first  is 
the  action  of  man's  free  will.  This  does  not  indeed  have 
the  power  to  bring  into  being  a  new  thing  in  the  mateiial 


I 


CREATioisr  259 

world,  but  it  does  produce  something  new  in  the  spiritual 
world,  by  which  the  direction  and  operation  of  material 
forces  may  be  altogether  changed.  Man  has  the  power 
which  the  brute  has  not — by  a  choice  which  is  spiritual, 
and  a  volition  which  is  equally  spiritual — to  set  free 
energy  and  produce  great  changes  in  the  external  world. 
The  President  of  the  United  States  sits  in  the  White 
House,  and  touching  an  electric  button,  starts  the  great 
Corliss  Engine  hundreds  of  miles  away  in  the  Exposition 
building  at  New  Orleans.  How  came  that  to  pass  ?  By 
a  choice  and  a  volition,  setting  free  and  directing  the 
energy  in  a  few  molecules  of  the  brain.  The  phj^sical 
force,  I  grant,  was  not  created ;  it  was  only  directed. 
But  what  was  that  spiritual  energy  which  has  the  wonder- 
ful power  of  directing  physical  energy  ?  Was  it  not  a  new 
thing  ?  did  not  the  free  will  act  creatively,  and  have  we 
not  here  an  analogy,  true  so  far  as  it  goes,  even  though  it 
may  not  go  very  far,  of  that  infinite  creative  activity  of 
God,  by  which  matter  and  energy  were  first  brought  into 
being  and  the  human  soul  itself  called  out  of  non-exist- 
ence into  reality  ?  The  other  operation  of  the  soul  to 
which  we  ascribe  a  creative  quality  is  the  imagination.  It 
is  illustrated  in  some  of  its  highest  exercises  by  the  artist's 
work.  He  has  indeed,  to  a  certain  extent,  the  material  of 
his  constructive  thought  in  the  things  of  the  external 
world  and  the  ideas  which  are  the  common  property  of 
man.  But  artistic  genius  does  more  than  arrange.  The 
common  language  of  the  race  expresses  a  real  truth  when 
it  declares  that  the  artist  creates.  Forms  of  beauty  ex- 
pressive of  noble  ideals  make  their  appearance  under  the 
magic  touch  of  his  brush  or  chisel.  They  had  no  previous 
existence.  There  is  in  them  an  element  that  is  new.  So 
the  poet  or  the  writer  of  fiction  sets  new  ideas  before  us, 
or  characters  which  live  and  move  in  the  world  of 
thought,  if  not  in  the  outside  world,  and  have  untold 
power  to  influence  the  lives  of  men.     I  readily  admit  that 


260  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

all  tins  is  but  a  far-off  imitation  of  what  God  has  done  in 
His  infinitely  higher  and  better  way.  But  I  cannot  but 
think  that  those  who  have  felt  the  glow  and  sense  of 
power  which  the  creative  work  of  art  engenders,  can  un- 
derstand, though  dimly,  something  of  God's  work  and  the 
joy  He  felt  as  He  beheld  His  masterpieces  issuing  from 
His  hand  and  saw  that  they  were  "  very  good." 

IV.  We  have  thus  far  dealt  chiefly  with  the  doctrine  of 
creation  which  belongs  to  a  theistic  natural  theology. 
But  there  is  also  a  distinctively  Christian  doctrine  of 
creation.  The  germs  of  this  higher  view  are  to  be  found 
in  the  cosmogony  of  Genesis  ;  its  fully  expanded  form  in 
the  New  Testament.  To  these  Christian  elements  in  the 
doctrine  we  shall  now  address  ourselves. 

Creation  is  the  work  of  the  Triune  God.  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Spirit  have  each  their  part  in  it.  It  originated 
with  the  Father,  it  was  executed  by  the  Son,  it  was  carried 
out  through  the  Holy  Spirit,  or,  if  I  may  so  speak,  the 
Spirit  was  the  immanent  principle  of  creation.  But  in  an 
especial  sense  creation  was  the  work  of  the  Son.  We 
have  touched  upon  this  truth  when  treating  of  the  rela- 
tion of  the  Christ  to  the  world,  and  need  speak  of  it  only 
briefly  here.  He  who  was  to  become  incarnate  that  he 
might  redeem  the  fallen  world,  was  the  Maker  of  the 
world.  He  laid  the  basis  of  redemption  in  creation.  He 
preformed  the  world  which  he  made  to  the  redemption 
which  he  was  to  accomplish.  The  world  was  thus  from 
the  first  in  a  peculiar  sense  his  own.  It  bears  the  mark 
of  the  Son  upon  it.  The  eternal  power  and  Godhead 
which  it  makes  known  is  in  a  peculiar  sense  the  power 
and  Godhead  of  the  Son.  The  world  he  created  was  the 
world  into  which  he  was  himself  to  enter  by  taking  its 
material  and  spiritual  form  upon  him  and  becoming  a 
link  in  its  evolution.  This  was  to  be  the  theatre  of  his 
highest  self-manifestation  in  the  drama  of  redeeming  love. 
It  was  from  the  first,  by  right  of  creation  by  the  eternal 


CEEATION  261 

Logos,  Cliiist's  world.  The  devil  might  gain  the  upper- 
hand  for  a  time,  but  he  was  only  the  usurper  certain  to  be 
destroyed  by  the  rightful  King.  Man  made  in  the  image 
of  God  was  made  by  the  Logos  the  uncreated  image  of 
God,  in  his  own  image  and  likeness,  and  his  dominion 
over  nature  was  a  dominion  which  belonged  to  him  in 
virtue  of  his  relation  to  the  divine  Son. 

Creation  originated  in  the  love  of  God.  This  is  the 
same  fact  which  met  us  when  we  were  considering  the 
eternal  plan  of  God.  It  was  the  overflowing  love  of 
God,  seeking  new  objects  upon  which  to  spend  itself,  that 
led  Him  to  create.  The  sin  which  has  so  marred  the 
creation  and  made  it  so  difficult  to  perceive  its  original 
nature  as  it  issued  in  its  primitive  goodness  from  the  di- 
vine hand,  blinds  us  to  this  fact,  which  it  is  the  object  of 
the  gospel  to  reveal  again  to  us.  If  we  could  see  things 
as  they  are,  we  should  not  doubt  it,  and  now  that  God  has 
made  it  known  to  us  through  the  work  of  Christ,  it  is  our 
duty  to  believe  where  we  cannot  see,  and  to  look  forward 
in  full  confidence  to  that  time  when  God  shall  show  us 
that  He  has  done  all  things  in  love.  In  creation  God 
made  that  He  might  give,  and  gave  that  He  might  make. 
We  have  seen  before  that  love  is  self-bestowal.  In  the 
creation  of  the  world  the  self-bestowal  which  had  found 
its  satisfaction  in  the  perfect  blessedness  of  the  holy 
Trinity,  found  new  objects  by  making  finite  beings. 

But  self-manifestation  is  closely  connected  with  self-be- 
stowal. God  also  created  that  He  might  express  His  per- 
fections in  the  finite  universe.  Creation  was  a  revelation 
of  God's  self.  The  world  is  what  it  is  because  God  is 
what  He  is.  As  the  painting  or  statue  makes  us  ac- 
quainted with  the  artist's  thought,  so  the  creation  makes  us 
acquainted  with  the  character  and  thought  of  God.  Even 
the  material  universe  reflects  God's  attributes.  "  The 
heavens  declare  the  glory  of  God ;  and  the  firmament 
showeth  his  handy  work"  (Psalm  xix.   1).     The  reason 


262  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

which  the  Apostle  Paul  gives  why  the  lieatheii  are  with- 
out excuse  in  their  sin,  is  that  "  the  invisible  things  of 
him  since  the  creation  of  the  world  are  clearly  seen,  being 
perceived  through  the  things  that  are  made,  even  his 
everlasting  power  and  divinity "  (Rom.  i.  20).  The 
"  everlasting  power  and  divinity  "  are  the  essential  glory 
of  God,  His  infinite  perfections,  His  attributes.  Nature 
is  not  merely  a  hieroglyphic  by  interpreting  which  we  can 
learn  God's  thought  and  will ;  it  is  itself  a  manifest  word 
of  God ;  it  bears  His  impress  upon  it ;  it  is  a  revelation  of 
Him.  God  did  not  make  something  altogether  different 
from  Himself  when  He  created  the  world ;  He  produced 
a  finite  similitude  of  Himself.  Therein  lies  the  reason 
for  the  idolatry  into  which  mankind  has  been  constantly 
fallino;.  The  heathen  have  recos-nized  in  nature  some- 
thing  divine,  but  they  have  not  distinguished  between  the 
copy  and  the  original,  between  the  reflection  and  the 
reality.  So  they  have  "  exchanged  the  truth  of  God  for 
a  lie,  and  worshipped  and  served  the  creature  rather  than 
the  Creator,  who  is  blessed  forever  "  (Rom.  i.  25).  It  was 
meant  that  men  should  "  look  through  nature  up  to  nat- 
ure's God."  The  divine  perfections  are  manifested  only 
partially  in  the  individual  forms  of  the  natural  woi-ld ; 
they  express  each  some  phase  or  aspect  of  God's  glory  ; 
there  shines  on  each  some  ray  from  the  perfect  Light. 
But  God  has  concentrated  His  self-revelation  through  the 
finite  in  the  being  who  is  the  culmination  of  the  long 
series  of  creations.  Man  was  made  in  the  image  of  God. 
He  does  not  express  merely  a  single  aspect  of  the  divine 
perfection,  but  is  the  finite  representation  of  God's 
spiritual  essence.  In  him  we  do  not  merely  discover  scat- 
tered lights  which  suggest  the  glory  of  the  perfect  Sun, 
but  the  Orb  of  Light  itself  is  imaged  in  its  perfect  form 
and  beauty  in  this  highest  of  all  the  creatures.  I  will  not 
anticijiate  what  is  to  be  said  hereafter  respecting  the  divine 
image.     Suffice  it  now  to  call  attention  to  the  fact  already 


CKEATION  263 

noticed,  that  the  creation  of  man  in  God's  image  lays  the 
basis  for  the  incarnation,  in  which  tiie  Word  became  Hesh 
and  the  eternal  Son  wrought  out  in  human  life  the  per- 
fect sonship.  Sin  has  marred  the  divine  image  in  us, 
but  when  we  wish  to  know  God  as  He  is,  we  can  turn 
from  ourselves  to  the  perfect  Man  Christ  Jesus,  and  see  in 
him  the  perfect  image  of  the  perfect  God.  And  more 
and  more  as  Christ  comes  to  dwell  in  us  and  to  change  us 
into  his  own  image,  we  can  discover  in  our  own  souls  the 
lineaments  of  God.     The  pure  in  heart  see  God. 

Finally,  Creation  had  for  its  object  redemption,  or  the 
establishment  of  God's  kingdom.  It  thus  was  the  first 
step  to  the  carrying  out  of  the  eternal  plan  of  God,  which 
also  aimed  at  redemption.  The  world  was  to  be  the 
arena  of  that  highest  display  of  God's  love,  the  salvation 
of  the  fallen  race.  Man  was  to  be  the  subject  of  redemp- 
tion, the  son  of  the  kingdom.  Christ  the  Redeemer  was 
here  to  be  incarnate.  If  God  was  omniscient  and  had 
from  eternity  formed  His  plan  of  redemption,  we  cannot 
doubt  that  when  He  called  the  universe  into  being,  He  had 
clearly  in  His  thought  all  the  wonderful  history  that  was  to 
transpire  in  it.  Sinai  and  Calvary  were  made  with  reference 
to  the  Law  and  the  Gospel.  Of  course,  if  this  view  be  true, 
creation  w^as  effected  with  reference  to  the  future  existence 
of  sin  in  the  world.  All  that  issued  from  the  divine  hand 
was  pure  and  good.  But  God  knew  that  man  by  the  abuse 
of  freedom  would  mar  the  perfect  works  of  God  ;  He  had 
permissively  ordained  that  it  should  be  so.  And  so  He 
made  a  world  which  provided  restraints  and  punishments 
for  sin,  as  well  as  facilities  for  a  work  of  redemptive  grace. 

Thus  God's  work  was  done.  The  morning  stars  sang 
together  and  all  the  sons  of  God  shouted  for  joy.  The 
six  days'  creative  toil  was  finished,  and  God  rested  on 
the  seventh  day  from  all  His  work  which  He  had  made. 
Now  begins  human  history  and  with  it  human  sin,  while 
God  enters  upon  His  work  of  redemption. 


XV. 

THE    PROVIDENCE   OF  GOD 

We  have  discussed  the  subject  of  creation,  and  now  we 
ask,  What  is  the  relation  in  which  God  stands  to  the  world 
which  lie  has  created  ?  It  is  easy  to  see  that  this  is  a 
question  not  only  of  theoretical,  but  also  of  vast  practical, 
importance.  For  here  we  are  in  the  world,  and  we  need 
to  know  whether  God  is  here  also,  and  whether  He  is  con- 
cerning himself  with  its  ongoings.  Is  He  a  God  afar  off, 
dwelling  in  some  remote  Heaven,  not  troubling  Himself 
with  the  aifairs  of  this  world,  its  material  processes,  the 
life  of  plant  and  animal,  the  joys  and  sorrows  of  men  ? 
Is  He  like  those  gods  of  whom  Tennyson  tells  us  in  "  The 
Lotos-Eaters,"  who 

"  Lie  beside  tlieir  nectar,  and  the  bolts  are  hurled 
Far  below  them  in  the  valleys,  and  the  cloiads  are  lightly  curled 
Round  their  golden  houses,  girdled  with  the  gleaming  world  ; 
"Where  they  smile  in  secret,  looking  over  wasted  lands, 
Blight  and  famine,  plague  and   earthquake,  roaring   deeps  and 

fiery  sands, 
Clanging  fights,  and  fliaming  towns,  and  sinking  ships,  and  pray- 
ing hands  ? " 

Is  He  such  a  God  as  that  ?  Or  is  He  the  God  who  is 
everywhere  present  and  active  in  His  world,  who  is  di- 
rectly interested  in  all  its  affairs,  from  the  fall  of  a  spar- 
row to  the  fate  of  an  empire,  from  the  beauty  of  the  lily 
to  the  provision  for  the  wants  of  His  people  ? 

Thank  God,  the  Christian  revelation  answers  these 
questions  with  no  uncertain  sound.     No  doctrine  in  the 


THE   PROVIDENCE   OF   GOD  265 

whole  range  of  religious  truth  is  taught  by  the  Bible  mure 
unequivocally  or  with  greater  fulness.  In  the  presence  of 
those  false  views  of  God  and  His  relation  to  the  world  with 
which  our  age  abounds,  we  need,  therefore,  to  proclaim 
with  the  strongest  emphasis  the  simple  but  profound  truth 
of  God's  providence  which  comes  to  us  through  the  Script- 
ures, and  is  verified  by  Christian  experience. 

I.  The  Christian  doctrine  of  providence  is  distinctively 
theistic.  It  declares  that  the  Absolute  Being  is  the  liv- 
ing, personal  God,  and  asserts  His  free  disposal  over  nat- 
ure and  man.  He  is  not  the  unknown  God  of  agnosti- 
cism, who  is  hidden  behind  the  impenetrable  veil  of  the 
finite,  and  of  whom  we  are  certain  only  that  He  is  the 
cause  and  ground  of  all  things.  He  is  not  the  impersonal 
and  unconscious  God  of  pantheism,  who  is  lost  in  the 
world  and  can  in  no  sense  be  said  to  control  it.  He  is 
not  the  "  absentee  God  "  of  deism,  who  has  left  his  world 
to  its  own  ways  since  He  has  brought  it  into  being,  and  has 
done  so  for  the  wise  reason  that  He  has  had  no  power  to 
interpose  in  its  affairs.  The  God  of  providence  made  the 
world  for  Himself,  He  sustains  it  in  being.  He  is  a  factor 
in  all  its  activities.  He  is  its  free  Ruler.  The  relation  in 
which  He  stands  to  the  world  through  His  providence  is  as 
close  and  vital  as  that  in  which  He  stood  in  its  creation. 

The  providence  of  God  may  be  considered  under  three 
aspects,  as  preservation,  immanence,  and  government.  We 
will  look  at  each  of  these. 

1.  By  preservation  is  meant  God's  providence  as  exer- 
cised in  maintaining  His  creatures  in  being.  According 
to  the  deistical  view  of  the  universe,  the  world  when  once 
created  is  self-existent.  God  has,  it  is  true,  the  power  to 
annihilate  it,  if  He  will — at  least  this  is  admitted  with  re- 
spect to  the  material  world — but  unless  He  sees  fit  to  do 
so,  it  will  continue  to  exist.  But  the  scriptural  teaching 
points  to  a  closer  relation  of  God  to  the  creation  than  this. 
Finite  beings  continue  in  existence  only  by  a  constant  ex- ' 


266  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

ercise  of  the  divine  power.  If  this  were  for  an  instant 
witlidi-awn,  they  would  cease  to  be,  as  the  shadow  ceases 
wlien  the  substance  which  casts  it  is  removed,  or  as  the 
light  ceases  when  the  lamp  is  extinguished. 

The  continuance  of  material  things  is  due  to  the  up- 
holding and  preserving  power  of  God.  The  scientific  law 
of  conservation,  according  to  which  the  quantity'  of  mattei- 
and  energy  in  the  world  remains  always  the  same,  and  can 
be  neither  increased  nor  diminished  by  any  processes  now 
at  work  or  under  the  control  of  man,  is  simply  the  expres- 
sion of  the  uniformity  of  the  divine  preservation  in  the 
material  sphere.  Matter  and  energy  are  the  constants  of 
the  universe,  but  it  is  only  because  God  is  behind  them. 
It  is  for  this  reason,  and  this  only,  that  we  can  speak  of 
the  uniformity  of  causation.  Moreover,  God  maintains 
the  properties  and  laws  of  matter  and  energy.  The  great 
cosmical  arrangements  by  which  the  perpetuity  of  life  on 
our  planet  is  maintained  are  due  to  the  same  preserving 
power.  God  Himself  has  given  us  the  promise  that, 
"  While  the  earth  remaineth,  seed-time  and  harvest,  and 
cold  and  heat,  and  summer  and  winter,  and  day  and  night, 
shall  not  cease  "  (Gen.  viii.  22). 

In  like  manner  God's  preserving  providence  is  the  cause 
of  the  maintenance  of  life.  What  is  life  ?  Is  it  an  inde- 
pendent entity,  a  principle  which  has  the  power  to  co-or- 
dinate the  activities  of  matter,  or  is  it  onlj'  a  function 
of  matter,  something  which  could  be  explained  entirely 
by  matter  and  energy,  if  we  only  liad  the  key  to  its  mys- 
tery ?  In  either  case  it  is  upheld  in  being  by  God's  con- 
stant energizing.  The  life  of  plant  and  animal  alike  is 
due  to  the  divine  preservation.  Death  is  the  result  of  the 
withdrawal  of  Ilis  supporting  power.  "  Thou  takest  away 
their  breath,"  said  the  Psalmist,  speaking  of  the  animal 
creation,  "  they  die  and  return  to  their  dust.  Thou  send- 
est  forth  thy  spirit,  they  are  created  ;  and  thou  reuewest 
the  face  of  the  ground  "  (Ps.  civ.  29,  30). 


THE   PROVIDENCE   OF   GOD  267 

So  also  God  preserves  the  huiiian  spirit.  As  its  tirst 
existence  was  the  result  of  a  divine  inbreathing  (Gen.  ii. 
7),  so  its  continuance  is  the  result  of  God's  power  con- 
stantly exercised  (Ps.  xxxvi.  6,  Ixvi.  9  ;  Job  xxxiv.  14, 
15),  It  is  commonly  asserted  that  the  human  soul  is  pos- 
sessed of  what  is  called  "  natural  immortality,"  that  is, 
that  it  is  indestructible,  and  theologians  often  go  so  far  as 
to  say  that  God  could  not  annihilate  a  soul  if  He  desired. 
But  there  is  not  a  hint  of  such  a  doctrine  in  the  Bible, 
and  those  who  think  that  by  asserting  it  they  can  refute 
the  unscriptural  doctrine  of  the  annihilation  of  the  un- 
godly, purchase  relief  at  quite  too  high  a  price.  If  God 
should  withdraw  His  power  from  the  soul,  it  would  sink 
into  nothingness,  and  if  it  be  true,  as  the  Bible  seems  to 
teach,  that  no  soul  is  ever  thus  "  cast  as  rubbish  to  the 
void,"  it  is  not  because  God  cannot  annihilate  it,  but  be- 
cause He  will  not.  Moreover,  God  maintains  the  powers 
of  the  soul  in  existence.  The  intellect,  the  sensibility,  the 
will,  the  free  agency  of  man,  the  activity  of  conscience, 
are  possible  only  upon  this  condition.  "  In  him  we  live 
and  move  and  have  our  being  "  (Acts  xvii.  28).  Even 
more  strikingly  is  the  spiritual  life  dependent  upon  God. 
For  what  is  the  spiritual  life  ?  It  is  the  right  relation  of 
the  soul  to  God,  the  state  of  things  in  which  God's  favor 
is  granted  to  man  and  man  lives  in  communion  with  God. 
"  This  is  life  eternal,  that  they  might  know  thee  the  only 
true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ  whom  thou  hast  sent "  (John 
xvii.  3).  When  the  soul  is  by  faith  united  with  God,  He 
pours  into  it  His  own  divine  life.  When  men  sin  against 
Him  he  withdraws  His  gracious  influences,  and  the  result 
is  spiritual  death. 

2.  Another  element  in  God's  providence  is  His  imma- 
nence. Preservation  has  to  do  with  the  maintenance  of 
the  creation  in  existence.  Immanence  has  to  do  with 
its  activities.  God  does  not  only  uphold  things  and  let 
them  work  according  to  their  properties  and  laws ;   He 


268  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

Himself  works  in  them  and  through  them.  lie  is  the 
First  Cause  nut  merely  in  the  sense  that  He  is  the  Creator 
and  Preserver,  but  also  in  the  sense  that  He  energizes  in 
the  second  causes.  This  is  the  great  element  of  truth 
among  all  the  errors  of  pantheism.  God  does  not  stand 
on  the  outside  of  His  creation,  but  is  everywhere  present 
and  active  in  it.  The  dew-drop  and  the  grass-blade  evi- 
dence the  presence  and  power  of  God  as  truly  as  the  sun 
or  the  planet.  The  Bible  gives  great  prominence  to  this 
doctrine  of  God's  immanence.  Indeed,  it  goes  so  far,  es- 
pecially in  the  Old  Testament,  that  sometimes  it  seems  as 
if  the  second  causes  were  entirely  swallowed  up  in  the 
First  Cause.  The  sacred  writers  drew  no  sharp  line  of 
demarcation  between  the  divine  and  the  creaturely  activ- 
ity. They  did  not  hesitate  to  ascribe  all  natural  events  to 
God.  "Thou  visitest  the  earth,"  said  the  Psalmist,  "and 
waterest  it,  thou  greatly  enrichest  it ;  the  river  of  God  is 
full  of  water ;  thou  providest  them  corn  when  thou  hast 
so  prepared  the  earth.  Thou  waterest  her  furrows  abun- 
dantly ;  thou  settlest  the  I'idges  thereof ;  thou  makest  it 
soft  with  showers  ;  thou  blessest  the  springing  thereof  " 
(Ps.  Ixv.  9,  10).  God's  immanence  merges  here  into  His 
government,  but  the  former  is  more  prominent.  Our  Sa- 
viour presents  the  same  view.  His  thought,  in  describing 
the  operations  of  nature,  is  not  upon  the  second  causes, 
but  upon  the  First  Cause.  God  clothes  the  grass  of  the 
field,  gives  man  his  daily  bread,  causes  the  sun  to  rise 
and  the  rain  to  fall  (Matt.  vi.  26-30,  vi.  11,  v.  45).  Even 
the  fi'ee  acts  of  men  ai'e  not  put  outside  the  sphere  of  the 
divine  causality,  as  a  deistical  philosophy  would  fain  have 
them.  In  the  evil  choices  and  acts  of  men,  it  is  true,  the 
causality  is  wholly  human  ;  the  relation  of  the  First  Cause 
to  the  creaturely  cause  is  here  strained  to  the  point  of 
severance.  But  in  the  good,  though  still  free,  choices 
and  acts  of  men,  God  is  active.  AVe  work  out  our  own 
salvation  with    fear  and    trembling,  while   God  worketh 


THE  PEOVIDENCE   OF   GOD  269 

in  us  to  will  and  to  do  of  His  good  pleasure  (Phil.  ii. 
12,  13). 

Now,  undoubtedly  this  truth  of  God's  immanence  runs 
close  to  pantheism.  But,  as  has  been  remarked,  it  gives 
us  the  truth,  and  not  the  errors,  of  pantheism.  It  does 
not  destroy  the  distinction  between  God  and  the  creature. 
The  second  cause  has  been  so  made  that  God  can  work 
through  it,  but  this  does  not  make  it  either  God  or  a 
power  of  God.  In  our  work  we  grasp  and  use  our  instru- 
ments from  the  outside.  God  has  the  power  to  enter  His 
instruments  and  use  them  from  within.  But  in  both  cases 
they  are  instruments.  The  forces  of  nature  are  not  the 
power  of  God,  although  His  power  is  manifested  in  and 
through  them.  The  old  definition  of  the  laws  of  nature, 
which  makes  them  modes  of  the  divine  operation,  is  cor- 
rect only  if  we  understand  it  to  refer  to  the  modes  of  the 
divine  operation  through  the  forces  of  nature.  We  may 
not  be  able  to  draw  the  line  of  separation  between  the 
divine  energy  and  finite  energy,  but  such  a  separation  ex- 
ists. The  one  is  spiritual ;  the  other  is  physical.  The  re- 
lation between  the  two  may  in  a  measure  be  illustrated  by 
the  relation  between  the  finite  spirit  and  the  body  with 
which  it  is  united.  Who  can  distinguish  between  mind- 
energy  and  brain-energy  ?  Yet  who  but  the  materialist 
doubts  that  the  distinction  exists. 

It  has  alwaj's  been  the  temptation  of  Calvinism,  in  the 
emphasis  which  it  has  laid  upon  the  divine  factor  in  re- 
demption, to  push  the  doctrine  of  the  divine  immanence 
to  such  an  extreme  as  to  reduce  second  causes  to  mere 
manifestations  of  the  First  Cause.  This  tendency  reached 
its  culmination  in  the  Hopkinsian  theolog}',  which  flour- 
ished in  New  England  during  the  last,  and  the  early  part 
of  the  present,  century.  We  find  traces  of  the  doctrine 
of  divine  efiiciency,  as  it  was  called,  in  the  writings  of 
Jonathan  Edwards,  but  it  is  expressed  in  its  fully  de- 
veloped form  in  the   works  of   Hopkins   and  Emmons. 


270  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

According  to  this  view,  God  is  the  efficient  cause  of  all 
things  and  events.  Dr.  Hopkins  says,  "The  innnediate 
exertion  of  divine  power  is  the  proper  efficient  cause  of 
every  event ;  so  that  all  power  is  in  God,  and  all  creatures 
which  act  or  move,  exist  and  move,  or  are  moved,  in  and 
by  Him"  (Works,  ed.  1852,  vol.  i.,  p.  165).  Dr.  Em- 
mons, the  daring  theologian  of  Franklin,  who  did  not 
fear  to  draw  any  of  the  consequences  which  his  logic 
seemed  to  require,  declared,  "To  suppose  that  either 
angels  or  men  can  act  independently  of  God,  is  to  sup- 
pose that  they  themselves  are  gods."  "  He  exerts  his 
agency  in  producing  all  the  free  and  voluntary  exercises 
of  every  moral  agent  as  constantly  and  fully  as  in  pre- 
serving and  supporting  his  existence  "  (Works,  ed.  1860, 
vol.  ii.,  p.  454).  Thus  God  was  made  the  author  of 
sin,  human  freedom  was  reduced  to  a  mere  name,  and 
men,  good  and  bad  alike,  became  puppets  in  the  hands  of 
God. 

But  the  dangers  which  attend  this  doctrine  of  the  di- 
vine immanence  should  not  blind  us  to  its  importance,  or 
drive  us  into  the  deistic  conception  of  God's  relation  to 
the  world.  The  First  Cause  is  present  and  active  in 
matter  and  energy,  in  vegetable  and  animal  life,  in  the 
human  soul,  in  the  spiritual  life. 

3.  God's  providence  reaches  its  highest  exercise  in  His 
government.  This  is  His  providence  in  the  strictest  sense 
of  the  term.  It  is  the  relation  in  which  God  stands  to 
His  creatures  as  their  free  Disposer.  There  is,  it  is  true, 
a  sense  in  which  He  is  free  in  preservation  and  imma- 
nence, but  it  is  a  freedom  exercised  in  maintaining  a 
fixed  and  unchangeable  order,  a  freedom  which  has  for  its 
effect  necessity.  Doubtless  God  could  at  any  moment 
turn  the  uniformity  of  nature  into  chaos  ;  but  it  is  certain 
God  never  would  do  so.  But  in  His  government  His 
freedom  does  not  move  along  the  fixed  grooves  of  an  un- 
changeable order.     He  attains  His   great  ends   by    such 


THE   PROVIDENCE   OF   GOD  271 

means  as  His  wisdom  determines,  and  guides  and  controls 
His  creatures  according  to  His  will. 

God  thus  freely  governs  the  inanimate  world.  Deism, 
which  regards  the  universe,  when  once  created,  as  self- 
sufficient,  protests  even  more  loudly  against  the  divine 
government  in  nature  than  against  preservation  and  im- 
manence. It  declares  that  there  is  no  room  in  the  uni- 
verse for  the  free  activity  of  God.  All  things  are 
governed  by  law.  Finite  effects  can  be  produced  only  by 
finite  causes.  The  divine  interposition,  which  the  doctrine 
of  providential  government  assumes,  is  excluded  by  the 
scientific  conception  of  the  world.  If  God  did  thus  inter- 
pose, there  would  be  evidence  of  it ;  there  would  be  effects 
which  could  not  be  explained  by  natural  causes.  But  this 
is  not  the  case.  So  far  as  man's  observation  extends, 
there  is  nothing  which  cannot  be  accounted  for  by  the 
operation  of  natural  forces.  And  yet,  in  spite  of  these 
objections,  we  claim  that  God  does  exercise  free  control 
over  nature.  We  claim  it  upon  the  authority  of  revela- 
tion. The  Scriptures  stand  or  fall  with  this  doctrine. 
The  words  of  the  Psalmist  express  the  invariable  teaching 
of  the  Bible :  "'  Whatsoever  Jehovah  pleased,  that  hath 
He  done,  in  heaven  and  in  earth,  in  the  seas  and  in  all 
deeps"  (Ps.  cxxxv.  6).  We  also  claim  that  this  doctrine 
is  an  essential  element  of  the  theistic  conception  of  God. 
To  assert  any  less  than  this  would  be  to  give  God  less 
power  in  His  universe  than  man  possesses.  We  are  able, 
in  virtue  of  our  freedom,  to  employ  the  forces  of  nature  in 
such  a  way  as  to  bring  about  our  ends.  We  do  it  not  in 
opposition  to  natural  law,  but  in  accordance  with  it.  It  is 
by  this  dominion  over  material  nature,  bestowed  upon 
him  by  God  at  his  creation,  that  man  has  built  up  the 
wonderful  fabric  of  modern  civilization.  He  thus  brines 
about  innumerable  effects  which  nature,  left  to  herself, 
would  never  accomplish.  And  shall  God  have  less  con- 
trol over  nature  than  we  ?     Shall  men  be  able  to  bring  on 


272  PRESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

a  rain  bj  burning  a  prairie  or  firing  off  a  quantity  of  gun- 
powder, and  God  not  be  able  to  answer  His  children 
when  in  time  of  drought  they  cry  to  Him  for  rain  ?  I 
know  that  it  is  said  that  in  the  case  of  men  the  efficient 
cause  is  visible ;  we  see  the  human  power  working  among 
the  natural  causes ;  but  in  the  case  of  God  we  see  no  such 
evidence  of  a  higher  causality.  I  freely  grant  that  there 
is  a  difference,  but  the  difference  lies  chiefly  in  the  fact 
that  man  has  a  body,  and  that  so  we  are  able  to  localize 
the  spiritual  cause,  while  God,  who  is  pure  Spirit,  is 
hidden  from  us.  But  if  we  admit  that  the  human  will, 
that  unseen  spiritual  power,  by  setting  free  an  infinitesimal 
amount  of  energy  in  the  material  substance  of  the  brain, 
can  set  in  operation  a  train  of  physical  and  material  pro- 
cesses which  will  result  in  the  explosion  of  a  mine,  or  the 
starting  of  complicated  machinery  a  thousand  miles  away  ; 
I  do  not  see  W'hat  difficulty  there  is  in  supposing  that  the 
divine  Will,  by  the  liberation  in  any  part  of  the  uni- 
verse of  minute  quantities  of  energy,  may  accomplish  the 
greatest  results.  It  is  not  possible  to  give  a  full  physical 
ex])lanation  of  any  outward  effect  of  the  free-will  of  man. 
The  tests  of  physics  and  chemistry  do  not  begin  to  be 
delicate  enough  to  take  account  of  the  hidden  process  which 
takes  place  in  the  brain.  Why  is  it  impossible  that  God 
should  produce  effects  in  nature  by  a  similar  hiding  of 
His  power  ?  It  is  not  through  the  efficient  causation  of 
the  will  that  we  know  its  operations  in  the  case  of  men, 
but  ]-ather  by  its  final  causation,  b}'  the  rationality  of  the 
effects.  So,  when  in  the  operations  of  nature  we  see  a 
rationality  which  irresistibly  directs  our  thoughts  to  God, 
we  need  not  be  troubled  if  we  cannot  discover  just  the 
point  at  which  His  Will,  working  as  an  efficient  cause,  set 
in  operation  the  train  of  physical  causes  by  which  tlie  re- 
sult has  been  accomplished.  A  child's  touch  can  set  in 
motion  the  avalanche  which  will  overwhelm  a  whole  vil- 
lage.    The  touch  of  the  divine  Will  upon  an  atom  might 


THE   PROVIDENCE   OF   GOD  273 

produce  tlie  storms  which  scattered  the  Spanish  Armada. 
I  can  understand  how  men  who  deny  human  freedom  may 
deny  tlie  divine  government;  if  they  are  consistent,  they 
will  go  further  and  deny  the  existence  of  God  Himself. 
But  I  do  not  perceive  any  rational  ground  npon  which 
those  who  hold  that  there  is  such  a  power  as  free-will  in 
man,  can  call  in  question  the  control  of  God  over  nature. 

But  God's  providential  government  is  not  confined  to 
the  natural  world  ;  it  extends  also  to  the  realm  of  spirits. 
God  rules  in  the  affairs  of  men  and  the  higher  intelli- 
gences. From  the  natnre  of  the  case  His  government  as- 
sumes a  different  character  when  it  has  to  do  with  free 
beings.  He  respects  the  freedom  which  He  has  made. 
He  lays  no  compulsion  upon  the  will  of  His  rational 
creatures.  But  He  rules  none  the  less  truly  because  His 
government  is  a  moral  government.  This  is  what  the 
Bible  teaches  from  one  end  to  the  other.  "  He"  doeth  ac- 
cording to  his  will  in  the  army  of  heaven,  and  among  the 
inhabitants  of  the  earth  :  and  none  can  stay  his  hand,  or 
say  unto  him,  What  doest  thou  ?  "  (Dan.  iv,  35).  His 
government  extends  to  the  free  acts  of  men.  "  A  man's 
heart  deviseth  his  way ;  but  the  Lord  directeth  his  steps  " 
(Prov.  xvi.  9).  Christians  are  "  His  workmanship,  created 
in  Christ  Jesus  for  good  works,  which  God  afore  prepared 
that  we  should  walk  in  them  "  (Eph.  ii.  10).  He  rules  in 
human  history.  "  The  kingdom  is  the  Lord's  ;  and  he  is 
the  ruler  over  the  nations  "  (Ps.  xxii.  28).  Even  the  sin- 
ful acts  of  men  are  under  His  control.  The  evil  which 
Joseph's  brethren  plot  is  turned  into  good  (Gen.  xlv. 
5-8).  God  causes  the  wrath  of  men  to  praise  Him,  and 
restrains  the  remainder  of  wrath  (Ps.  Ixxvi.  10).  He 
overrules  the  sin  of  the  Jews  and  Pilate  for  the  ac- 
complishment of  His  purpose  of  redemption  (Acts  ii.  23, 
iv.  27,  28).  The  influences  which  are  brought  to  bear  are 
moral.  The  human  will  is  guided  by  motives  which 
leave  full  play  for  the  exercise  of  freedom.  Reward  and 
18 


274  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

piinishiiient  play  their  part.  But  in  one  way  and  another 
God  carries  His  purposes  tliroiigh,  and  men  do  His  will 
either  in  glad  co-opei-ation  or  in  spite  of  themselves. 

11.  A  number  of  special  problems  meet  us,  as  we  take 
the  subject  of  God's  providence  into  more  careful  consid- 
eration. 

1.  The  first  concerns  the  extent  of  God's  providence. 
The  deistic  tendency  of  which  mention  has  been  made, 
when  it  has  been  overcome  on  the  open  battle-field  of  the 
doctrine,  entrenches  itself,  as  in  a  sort  of  last  ditch,  in  the 
denial  of  the  universality  of  God's  providence.  Cicero 
voiced  this  denial  in  his  well-known  words,  "The  gods 
take  care  of  the  great  things  and  disregard  the  small  " 
("De  Natura  Deorum,"  H.  66).  But  there  can  be  no  ques- 
tion what  is  required  by  tlie  teachings  of  Scriptui-e  and 
the  theistic  conception  of  God.  His  providence  is  par- 
ticular as  well  as  general.  It  extends  to  the  minutiae  of 
His  universe  as  well  as  to  the  great  operations  and  events 
of  its  administration.  Nothing  is  too  small  for  the  infi- 
nite God.  He  numbers  the  very  hairs  of  our  heads  (Matt. 
X.  30).  Such  care  for  the  least  of  His  creatures,  so  far 
from  being  derogatory  to  the  almighty  God,  is  rather  the 
evidence  of  His  almightiness. 

2.  Another  interesting  question  relates  to  the  subject 
of  special  providence.  This  is  often  confounded  with 
God's  particular  providence,  but  it  is  not  the  same.  The 
particular  providence  extends  to  all  beings  and  events. 
The  special  providence  is  God's  government  when  di- 
rected to  results  of  especial  or  extraordinary  importance, 
whether  connected  wnth  the  great  interests  of  His  king- 
dom or  the  welfare  of  individual  members  of  it.  Special 
providence  is  denied  on  the  ground  that  it  implies  par- 
tiality on  the  part  of  God.  Now,  God  is  not  pai'tial  in  the 
sense  of  being  inequitable.  He  maketh  His  sun  to  rise 
on  the  evil  and  the  good,  and  sendeth  rain  on  the  just  and 
the  unjust  (Matt.  v.  45).     We  have  reason  to  believe  that 


THE   PKOVIDENCE   OF   GOD  275 

none  of  His  cliildren  ever  cry  to  Hiin  in  vain.  Even  in 
His  spiritual  dealings  with  men,  though  there  are  some 
dark  problems  which  we  cannot  easily  solve,  we  do  not 
doubt  that  He  gives  to  all,  at  some  time  and  in  some  way, 
all  the  grace  that  is  needful  for  salvation.  Nevertheless, 
God  does  not  deal  with  all  alike.  His  wisdom  leads  Him 
to  choose  the  best  means  by  which  to  attain  His  great 
ends,  and  in  so  doing  He  is  continually  concentrating  His 
providential  activity  upon  certain  points.  In  His  work  of 
redemption  the  interests  of  the  kingdom  are  of  more  im- 
portance than  those  of  any  individual  in  it,  and  some 
individuals  are  of  more  importance  in  relation  to  the  pro- 
gress of  the  kingdom  than  others.  So  there  are  occasions 
in  the  individual  life  when  God's  providence  becomes 
peculiarly  manifest,  as  in  its  great  crises  and  deliverances. 
The  Bible  is  full  of  such  special  providences.  Its  funda- 
mental doctrine  of  election  by  which  the  individual  is 
chosen  by  God  and  fitted  for  especial  work  in  His  king- 
dom, is  pre-eminently  a  doctrine  of  special  providence. 

3.  Again,  the  question  is  asked,  Is  there  such  a  thing 
as  chance?  The  view  of  God's  providential  government 
which  has  been  taken,  and  which  I  verily  believe  to  be 
the  scriptural  view,  leads  us  to  reply  without  hesitation  in 
the  negative.  When  we  look  at  the  events  of  the  world 
about  us  from  the  lower  side,  leaving  out  of  view  God's 
relation  to  them,  we  may  legitimately  speak  of  chance, 
though  even  here  physical  science  comes  in  with  its  teach- 
ings respecting  the  universality  of  law,  and  bids  us  remem- 
ber that  we  use  the  word  in  a  very  limited  sense.  But  in 
the  higher  sphere  we  may  use  the  word  only  as  expressive 
of  our  ignorance  of  the  divine  purpose.  Here,  to  bor- 
row Pope's  phrase  in  the  "  Essay  on  Man,"  all  chance  is 
direction  which  we  cannot  see.  "  The  lot  is  cast  into  the 
lap ;  but  the  whole  disposing  thereof  is  of  the  Lord " 
(Prov.  xvi.  33). 

4.  Once  more,  our  subject   brings   before  us   the   re- 


276  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

lation  of  God's  providential  government  to  prayer.  Here 
also  we  must  avoid  the  deistical  tendency  which  conceives 
of  God  as  unable  to  take  any  active  part  in  the  ongoings 
of  His  world.  Such  a  view  makes  prayer  a  mere  form,  oi-, 
as  Buslmell  says,  "a  kind  of  dumbbell  exercise,  good  as 
exercise,  but  never  to  be  answered"  ("Kature  and  the 
Supernatural,"  p.  452).  The  Bible  doctrine  of  prayer  im- 
plies such  a  providence  as  that  which  we  have  been  con- 
sidering. It  is  an  asking  for  things  which  God  alone  can 
give,  and  which  He  does  give  in  answer  to  our  petitions. 
The  Bible  saints  prayed  for  food  and  raiment  and  I'ain,  and 
victory  over  their  enemies,  and  help  in  their  daily  life,  as 
well  as  for  the  blessings  which  aie  distinctively  spiritual. 
They  believed  that  God  had  control  of  nature  and  of  man, 
and  that  He  disposed  of  events  so  as  to  bring  about  re- 
sults which  would  not  have  been  bi'ought  about  excej^t  for 
their  prayers.  Thanksgiving,  adoration,  confession  had  a 
part  in  those  Bible  prayers,  but  everything  convei'ges  in 
the  request  for  definite  blessings.  Xow,  if  the  doctrine  of 
God's  providence  which  I  have  pi'esented  is  true,  if  God 
freely  controls  the  realms  of  nature  and  man,  and  if  in 
this  there  is  nothing  inconsistent  with  the  teachings  of 
physical  science  truly  so  called,  I  see  no  reason  why  we 
should  not  hold  as  genuine  and  comprehensive  a  doctrine 
of  prayer  to-day.  Only  let  us  guard  against  the  other  ex- 
treme, which  gives  man  the  power  through  praj'er  to  dic- 
tate to  the  Almighty  what  He  shall  do  and  not  do.  God's 
freedom  and  power  as  the  Governor  of  the  universe  are 
guided  by  wisdom  and  love.  Because  He  can  give  us  all 
that  we  ask,  it  does  not  follow  that  He  will.  The  decision 
lies  not  with  us,  but  with  Him.  He  has  encouraged  us  to 
come  to  Him  in  all  our  needs,  temporal  and  spiritual,  ad- 
dressing Him  as  "  Oui-  Father."  But  in  our  ignorance 
we  shall  inevitably  ask  for  many  things  which  are  not 
best  as  regards  the  interests  of  His  kingdom,  and  there- 
fore not  best  for  us.     The  right  of  petition  is  freely  given 


THE   PROVIDENCE   OP   GOD  277 

US,  The  right  of  decision  belongs  to  Ilim.  Our  prayer 
should  always  have  the  proviso,  "Thy  will  be  done!" 
The  notion  that  if  we  have  a  sufficient  amount  of  faith 
we  can  carry  the  will  of  God  by  storm,  is  most  unscriptural 
and  pernicious.  Bnt  we  should  come  to  Him  with  the 
full  persuasion  that  He  is  able  to  give,  and  that  He  will 
give  all  that  it  is  wise  for  us  to  have,  and  that  He  is  "  a 
Revvarder  of  them  that  diligently  seek  Him."  He  may 
not  see  fit  to  give  what  we  ask,  but  He  will  always  be- 
stow His  blessing. 

5,  The  most  serious  of  all  these  problems  is  that  which 
concerns  the  relation  of  God's  providence  to  sin.  But  I 
shall  refer  to  the  subject  here  only  very  briefly,  because 
we  have  already  encountered  its  difficulties  in  discussing 
the  divine  plan.  Providence  is  simplj^  the  execution  of  a 
part  of  the  plan  in  time,  and  stands  in  the  same  relation  to 
sin  as  did  the  plan  itself.  Unquestionably  we  must  admit 
that  the  divine  providence  extends  to  all  the  sinful  acts 
of  men.  God  has  brought  the  sinner  into  the  world  and 
keeps  him  here  in  spite  of  his  sin.  The  environment 
in  which  he  is  placed  with  its  mingled  good  and  evil  is 
due  to  the  wise  arrangement  of  God.  God  supplies  the 
conditions  by  which  the  choice  out  of  which  the  sin  comes 
is  made  possible.  But  while  all  this  is  true,  the  author- 
ship of  sin,  and  the  responsibility  for  it,  belong  to  the 
man  himself.  In  no  sense  is  God  the  author  of  sin.  He 
hates  it  and  is  always  working  against  it.  The  fact  that 
for  wise  reasons  He  has  permitted  the  present  amount  of 
sin  is  in  no  way  opposed  to  His  perfect  love  and  holiness. 
He  has  provided  for  its  removal  by  redemption  and  for 
its  restraint  by  punishment.  In  the  end  He  will  turn  it 
against  itself  and  make  it  subservient  to  the  establish- 
ment of  His  kingdom. 

III.  As  we  concluded  our  consideration  of  the  doctrine 
of  creation  by  an  examination  of  its  distinctively  Christian 
aspects,  so  we  may  do  in  the  case  of  the  doctrine  before 


278  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

US.  A  theistic  natural  theology  and  the  Christian  theol- 
ogy which  the  Bible  makes  known  to  us  contain  a  com- 
mon doctrine  of  providence,  so  far  as  the  more  general 
features  are  concerned,  but  the  redemptive  revelation  adds 
some  new  aTid  higher  facts. 

1.  The  chief  end  of  providence  is  the  establishment  of 
the  kingdom  of  God  or  the  redemption  of  mankind.  This 
furnishes  us  with  the  key  to  all  the  divine  operations  in 
jiature  and  in  the  human  sphere.  This  is  the  fact  which 
brings  into  unity  all  these  varied  and  complicated  oper- 
ations. All  that  God  does,  whether  in  the  realm  of  nature 
or  in  that  of  grace,  is  a  means  to  this  great  end.  What 
to  us  seems  dark  and  meaningless  is  so  only  because  we 
do  not  perceive  its  connection  with  the  establishment  of 
the  kingdom.  "The  darkness  is  in  us,  not  in  God's  provi- 
dence. If  we  could  see  things  in  their  true  relations,  all 
would  be  light.  Slow  is  the  process  by  which  the  infinite 
Wisdom  attains  its  results,  but  it  is  very  sure.  Kothing 
is  in  vain.  The  operations  of  nature,  the  events  of  human 
history,  the  vicissitudes  of  individual  human  experience, 
all  co-operate  under  the  divine  guidance  to  bring  about 
the  high  consummation.  How  beautifully  are  we  taught 
this  truth  by  the  Bible,  that  handbook  of  the  divine  prov- 
idence !  We  call  its  annals  of  the  Hebrew  nation  and 
the  early  Christian  church  sacred  history,  not  because  it 
was  intrinsically  more  sacred  than  the  history  of  our  own 
times,  but  because  the  sacredness  of  it  is  made  manifest. 
The  veil  is  lifted  and  the  divine  background  is  revealed. 
We  see  each  event,  whether  in  the  fortunes  of  nations  or 
of  individual  men,  standing  in  its  true  relation  to  God  and 
His  work  of  redemption.  The  lesson  is  that  there  is  such 
a  relation  in  all  ages.  When  Christians  come  to  realize 
the  full  meaning  of  God's  providence  in  its  relation  to  the 
establishment  of  His  kingdom,  history  will  be  written 
after  a  new  method.  The  Bible  will  give  the  pattern. 
The  historian  will  be  a  prophet.     It  will   be  his  business 


THE   PROVIDENCE   OF   GOD  279 

to  interpret  the  divine  providence,  and  show^  how  all  the 
events  and  movements  and  changes  of  each  age  are  con- 
nected witli  the  fulfilment  of  God's  purpose  of  grace. 
Just  here  also  lies  the  test  of  individual  faith.  We  need 
to  learn  the  full  application  of  those  deep  words  of  Paul, 
"  We  know  that  all  things  work  together  for  good  to  them 
that  love  God,  to  them  who  are  the  called  according  to 
his  purpose  "  (Rom.  viii.  28).  It  is  because  the  believer 
is  a  member  of  God's  kingdom,  identified  with  it,  God's 
worker  in  it,  that  nothing  but  good  can  befall  him.  For 
if  all  God's  providence  aims  at  the  promotion  of  the  king- 
dom, and  the  Christian  is  a  constituent  element  in  the 
kingdom,  then,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  his  good  must 
be  piomoted  by  all  things.  "  God  is  for  him,  and  who 
can  be  against  him  ?  ISTeither  death,  nor  life,  nor  angels, 
nor  principalities,  nor  things  present,  nor  things  to  come, 
nor  powers,  nor  height,  nor  depth,  nor  any  other  creature, 
shall  be  able  to  separate  him  from  the  love  of  God 
(Eom.  viii.  31,  38,  39). 

2.  Providence  belongs  to  each  of  the  three  Persons  in 
the  blessed  Trinity.  With  respect  to  each  of  the  three, 
revelation  gives  us  a  distinct  and  characteristic  element  of 
the  doctrine  we  are  discussing. 

Providence  originates  with  God  as  Father,  and  the 
Bible  has  given  us  a  doctrine  of  providence  which  is 
rooted  in  the  Fatherhood  of  God.  The  ethnic  religions 
have  tlieir  glimpses  of  a  beneficent  providence.  Zeus,  the 
liead  of  the  Greek  Pantheon,  is  even  called  the  Father. 
But  it  was  reserved  for  the  Christian  revelation,  and  par- 
ticularly for  Jesus  Christ  himself,  to  disclose  the  truth 
that  in  all  His  acts  and  ways  the  God  of  providence  is  the 
Father  of  His  creatures.  Tlie  hand  which  rules  the  uni- 
verse is  guided  by  love.  Behind  every  dark  event,  yea  in 
it,  is  the  Father's  gracious  power. 

The  agent  of  providence  is  the  divine  Son.  The  pre- 
serving  providence   of   God   belongs   especially  to  him. 


280  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

"In  him  all  things  consist"  (Col.  i.  17).  He  upholds 
all  things  by  the  word  of  liis  power  (lleb.  i.  3).  "  In 
liim  was  life ;  and  the  life  was  the  light  of  men  "  (John  i. 
4).  The  providential  government  of  the  world  belongs 
also  to  him.  But  the  chief  and  most  notable  Christian  ad- 
dition to  the  doctrine  of  providence  relates  to  the  risen 
Christ.  The  incarnation  brought  mankind  into  a  new  re- 
lation to  God.  Since  the  Saviour  has  ascended  to  God's 
right  hand,  the  Godman  sits  upon  the  throne  of  the  uni- 
verse, and  there  is  a  true  sense  in  which  man  rules  the 
world  in  his  person.  For  the  purpose  of  completing  the 
redemptive  work  and  establishing  the  kingdom,  all  au- 
thority has  been  given  him  in  heaven  and  on  earth.  To 
him  has  been  committed  the  providence  of  God.  Until 
the  work  is  done,  the  holy  manhood  of  the  Christ  will 
thus  participate  in  all  the  operations  of  providence.  It  is 
Jesus  Christ  who  is  guiding  the  destinies  of  the  universe. 
As  the  King  of  the  kingdom  he  is  also  the  Lord  of  provi- 
dence. "  He  must  reign  till  he  hath  put  all  his  enemies 
under  liis  feet."  "  And  when  all  things  have  been  sub- 
jected unto  him,  then  shall  the  Son  also  himself  be  sub- 
jected to  him  that  did  subject  all  things  unto  him,  that 
God  may  be  all  in  all "  (1  Cor.  xv.  25,  28). 

It  is  through  the  Holy  Spirit  that  God's  providence  is 
accomplished.  Wherever  the  Creator  comes  into  contact 
with  the  creature,  it  is  through  the  Spirit.  He  is  the 
principle  of  the  divine  immanence,  the  indwelling  God. 
He  is  the  omnipresent  energy  of  God.  By  His  free 
movement  and  operation  in  the  world  the  divine  govern- 
ment is  accomplished.  Through  Him  God  acts  upon  the 
hearts  of  men.  He  touches  the  conscience  and  influences 
the  will.  But  more  particularly,  He  carries  out  God's 
providential  work  in  redemption.  He  comes  to  men  as 
the  Spirit  of  the  risen  Christ,  with  all  the  power  of  His 
redemptive  grace,  and  brings  the  divine  influences  to  bear 
upon  their  souls.     Then,  when  the  soul  is  brought  to 


THE   PEOVIDENCE   OF   GOD  281 

Christ  and  born  again,  He  is  an  indwelling  providence, 
shaping  it  into  accordance  with  the  image  of  Christ,  and 
inspiring  it  for  every  good  word  and  work. 

We  thus  complete  our  examination  of  the  Christian 
doctrine  of  providence.  We  have  distinguished  the  theis- 
tic  conception  of  providence  from  that  deistical  view  of 
God's  relation  to  the  world  which  to  all  intents  and  pur- 
poses excludes  Him  from  His  own  creation.  We  have 
considered  in  detail  each  of  the  three  great  factoi's  in  the 
divine  providence — preservation,  immanence,  and  govern- 
ment. The  more  important  problems  connected  with  the 
doctrine  have  been  examined.  Finally,  the  distinctively 
Christian  elements  have  been  brought  before  us.  It  is  one 
of  the  most  important  doctrines  of  the  Christian  system. 
Well  for  us,  if  we  can  apprehend  it,  and  believe  it,  and 
apply  it  to  our  own  lives. 


XVI. 

MAN* 

"  "What  is  man  ?  "  The  Psalmist's  question  is  asked 
anew  in  every  age  by  every  thouglitful  soul.  On  everv 
side  of  us  are  mysteries.  God  and  the  world  are  enigmas 
to  which  we  can  give  only  scanty  solution.  But  man  is 
in  many  respects  the  greatest  mystery  of  all.  He  is,  as 
Augustin  has  said  (Confessions,  Bk.  iv.,  ch.  14),  "  a  gi-eat 
deep,"  which  we  cannot  fathom.  What  is  this  I,  this 
thinking,  willing,  feeling  Self,  that  strives  and  loves  and 
sins  and  dies?  What  is  this  race  of  men  about  me,  this 
seething  current  of  souls  like  mine,  moving  onward  inces- 
santly from  the  cradle  to  the  grave  ?  An  CEdipus  was 
found  to  answer  the  Sphinx's  riddle.  The  creature 
which,  being  born  four-footed,  afterward  becomes  two- 
footed,  and  then  three-footed,  is  Man,  the  creeping  infant, 
the  vigorous  youth  and  adult,  the  aged  pilgrim  leaning  on 
his  staff.  But  who  can  answer  that  harder  riddle,  What 
is  man  ?  What  (Edipus  will  slay  the  Sphinx  who  asks  it 
and  give  us  rest  from  her  persecutions  ? 

One  satisfactory  answer  has  been  given,  and  only  one. 
It  is  that  of  the  Bible.  It  seems  to  me  that,  as  the  cen- 
turies pass,  we  do  not  advance  a  single  step  beyond  it. 
Human  science  and  philosophy  have  told  us  much  about 
man.  They  give  us  his  place  in  the  scale  of  being,  they 
describe  his  animal  functions  and  analj'ze  his  mental  pow- 
ers, they  trace  his  history  and  his  achievements,  they 
throw  some  light  upon  his  probable  future.  But  w^hat 
man  is  they  do  not  tell  us.     The  Bible,  on  the  contrary, 

*  This  subject  is  also  treated  by  the  author  in  an  article  entitled 
"  The  Christian  Conception  of  Man,"  in  the  Andover  Keview,  vol.  i.,  p. 
465. 


MAN  283 

does  tell  us.  It  takes  us  up  to  h  higher  point  of  view,  and 
shows  us  man  in  his  relation  to  God.  It  throws  upon 
him  the  light  of  heaven  and  eternity,  and  in  that  light  it 
treats  of  his  origin,  his  nature,  his  historj^,  and  his  des- 
tiny. And  lo,  what  we  seek  has  been  found  ;  the  riddle 
has  been  solved. 

As  we  pass  from  the  doctrine  of  God  to  that  of  man,  I 
hope  we  shall  be  able  to  maintain  this  Bible  standpoint. 
It  is  a  fault  of  our  treatises  on  theology  that  their  anthro- 
pology, or  doctrine  of  man,  is  largely  developed  from  the 
lower  side,  and  that  it  involves  us  in  questions  of  human 
science  and  philosophy  without  disclosing  the  higher 
truth  which  we  are  striving  to  reach.  Theology  is  the 
science  of  God.  It  is  concerned  with  the  world  and  man 
only  in  their  relation  to  God.  Let  our  anthropology  be 
at  the  same  time  divinity.  The  secret  of  man  is  to  be 
found  in  God. 

I.  We  begin  by  asking  concerning  the  chief  end  of 
man.  The  answer  which  comes  most  readily  to  our 
minds  is  that  of  the  Assembly's  Catechism,  couched  in  a 
phrase  so  apt  as  almost  to  make  us  believe  in  the  continu- 
ance of  inspiration,  "  Man's  chief  end  is  to  glorify  God 
and  to  enjoy  Him  forever."  It  will  not  be  from  any  lack 
of  reverence  for  these  time-honored  words,  that  I  shall 
give  another  answer,  but  that  our  statements  here  may 
correspond  with  those  already  made.  Indeed,  the  differ- 
ence between  the  two  answers  will  be  only  in  form.  We 
have  seen  that  the  chief  end  of  God  in  His  eternal  plan 
was  the  establishment  of  His  kingdom  or  redemption. 
This  also  was  His  great  object  in  creation,  as  it  is  in  His 
providence.  Now,  the  chief  end  of  God's  plan  and  work 
is  the  chief  end  of  man's  being.  He  exists  for  the  king- 
dom of  God  or  for  redemption.  He  freely  carries  out 
this  purpose  of  his  creation,  when  he  obeys  the  Saviour's 
injunction  and  seeks  "  first  the  kingdom  of  God  and  his 
righteousness  "  (Matt.  vi.  33).     This  is  the  hidden  treas- 


284  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

lire,  the  pearl  of  great  ])rice,  compared  with  which  all 
other  objects  of  human  life  and  effort  sink  into  insignifi- 
cance (Matt.  xiii.  44-46). 

This  destination  of  man  for  redemption  or  the  kingdom 
of  God  implies  a  number  of  more  specific  facts.  The  first 
of  these  is  the  existence  of  sin.  Our  discussion  of  the 
divine  plan,  as  well  as  of  the  doctrines  of  creation  and 
providence,  has  prepared  us  for  the  acceptance  of  this 
fact.  God  has  always  known  that  man  would  abuse  his 
freedom.  From  the  first  He  intended  to  permit  sin  to 
exist,  that  He  might  overrule  it  for  a  greater  good.  Re- 
demption, which  is  conditioned  upon  sin,  was  as  much  a 
part  of  the  plan  as  creation  and  providence.  Redemption 
was  not  an  after- thought  on  God's  part ;  it  was  a  fore- 
thought. The  only  kingdom  which  God  contemplated,  so 
far  as  this  world  was  concerned,  was  a  kingdom  that  was 
to  be  established  by  redemption.  Man's  chief  end  is, 
therefore,  the  chief  end  of  a  sinner,  and  to  be  attained 
only  by  salvation.  But  this  does  not  imply  that  sin  is  an 
essential  element  in  the  idea  of  man.  On  the  contrary,  it 
is  a  divergence  from  the  true  idea  of  man,  resulting  from 
the  misuse  of  freedom,  which  God  has  indeed  for  w^ise 
reasons  permitted,  but  neither  approved  nor  efficiently 
brought  about.  In  his  true  idea  man  is  holy,  and  the 
whole  aim  of  the  divine  working  in  redemption  is  to  de- 
stroy his  sin  and  make  him  holy. 

Tlie  doctrine  of  man's  chief  end,  accordingly,  implies 
that  he  was  made  to  love  and  obey  God.  This  is  the 
meaning  of  the  kingdom :  it  is  the  state  of  thinojs  in 
which  God's  will  is  perfectly  done  and  the  command 
obeyed,  "  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy 
heart  and  with  all  thy  soul  and  with  all  thy  strength  and 
with  all  thy  mind."  The  kingdom  comes  just  in  so  far 
as  this  result  is  reached.  Redemption  is  at  once  the  pro- 
cess by  which  the  result  is  reached  and  the  result  itself. 
Sin  is  the  abnormal  fact  in  man.     It  is  what  ousht  not  to 


MAN  285 

be.  The  recognition  of  it  which  is  implied  in  the  chief 
end,  as  it  has  been  stated,  is  wholly  de  facto  and  in  no 
respect  de  jure.  God  has  permitted  it  only  that  He 
might  destroy  it.  The  normal  man  .o  the  heavenly  man, 
washed  in  the  Saviour's  blood,  made  perfectly  clean  and 
holy,  purged  from  all  sellishness,  in  whose  heart  bm-ns 
ever  the  pure  flame  of  perfect  love. 

Again,  man's  destination  for  the  kingdom  or  redemp- 
tion implies  that  he  was  made  for  communion  and  fellow- 
ship of  God.  He  was  not  meant  to  be  an  independent 
being,  living  in  his  own  strength  and  for  his  own  pur- 
poses. When  the  sky  shuts  him  in  and  he  lives  for  ma- 
terial things,  and  has  no  personal  knowledge  of  God  and 
intercourse  with  Him,  the  world  with  all  its  beauty  is  a 
prison-vault  and  man  falls  short  of  his  true  being.  As 
Augustin  says,  "  Thou,  O  God,  hast  made  us  for  thy- 
self, and  our  hearts  are  restless  till  they  find  their  rest  in 
Thee!"  (Confessions,  Bk.  I.,  ch.  1).  "This  is  life  eter- 
nal, that  they  should  know  Thee,  the  only  true  God,  and 
him  whom  thou  didst  send,  even  Jesus  Christ "  (Jolni 
xvii.  3).  With  God  is  the  fountain  of  life.  Fellowship 
with  Him  is  the  proper  state  of  man  in  this  world,  and  it 
carries  with  it  the  certainty  of  the  unending  blessedness 
in  the  other  world.  Because  man  is  made  for  the  king- 
dom, he  is  made  for  heaven. 

Moreover,  man  as  made  for  the  kingdom  was  made  foi- 
Jesus  Christ,  the  King  of  the  kingdom,  the  Redeemer  of 
mankind.  He  is  the  Head  of  mankind,  the  Son  of  Man. 
He  died  for  all  men.  He  has  raised  mankind  in  his  own 
person  from  earth  to  heaven.  He  is  the  source  of  all 
spiritual  blessings.  The  work  of  the  kingdom  is  his 
work.  He  lays  rightful  claim  upon  the  obedience  of  all 
men.  To  die  is  to  be  with  him.  He  is  the  glory  and 
the  blessedness  of  the  heavenly  state.  In  his  coming, 
human  history  is  to  culminate.  He  is  to  call  the  dead 
from  their  graves  and  to  judge  men  and  angels.     In  the 


286  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

final  state  he  will  be  the  Husband  of  the  mystic  Bride  his 
church. 

Once  more,  the  chief  end  of  man  is  the  chief  end  not 
merely  of  individuals,  but  of  mankind.  There  is  an  ideal 
of  manhood  in  the  race  toward  which  human  history 
moves,  and  which  is  to  be  attained  by  redemption.  Men 
were  not  made  to  live  in  isolation,  but  to  form  a  holy 
society,  a  temple  for  the  indwelling  of  God.  The  idea  of 
the  kingdom  involves  union  and  organization.  There  is 
to  be  not  only  love  to  God  but  love  to  men — sonship  and 
brotherhood.  The  kingdom  is  realized  in  this  world  just 
in  so  far  as  men  are  brought  into  their  true  relations  to 
each  other.  In  the  consummation  all  men  are  to  be 
united  into  one  under  Christ  the  Head,  and  the  church  is 
to  be  coextensive  with  mankind.  The  individual  attains 
his  true  end  only  in  connection  with  his  fellow-men,  as  he 
lives  among  them  and  labors  for  them  in  love.  In  com- 
mon with  all  the  children  of  God  the  world  over,  his  aim 
is  to  build  up  the  kingdom,  employing  for  this  end  the 
divinely  ordained  institutions  of  the  church,  the  family, 
the  state,  and  those  other  instrumentalities  by  which  God 
realizes  the  purpose  of  His  kingdom. 

Finally,  the  destination  of  man  for  the  kingdom  im- 
plies his  dominion  over  the  natural  world,  material  and 
sentient.  The  world  does  not  in  its  own  right  belong  to 
the  kingdom.  Man  is  the  medium  through  which  it  is 
brought  into  connection  with  God's  great  purpose.  It  was 
meant  that  man  should  be  at  once  the  lord  and  the  high- 
priest  of  nature.  Human  sin  has  brought  the  creation 
under  the  bondage  of  corruption,  and  made  man  a  servant 
where  he  should  be  a  master.  But  redemption  will  even 
here  restore  what  has  been  lost ;  "  the  creation  itself  also 
shall  be  delivered  from  the  bondage  of  corruption  into  the 
liberty  of  the  glory  of  the  children  of  God  "  (Bom.  viii. 
21),  and  man  shall  recover  his  rightful  dominion. 

II.  We  ask  next,  What  are  the  peculiar  characteristics 


MAN  287 

of  man,  wliicli  fit  him  for  the  high  end  of  his  existence? 
We  are  thus  brought  to  the  scriptural  account  of  man's 
creation  and  the  other  teachings  of  the  Bible  respecting 
man's  nature. 

There  are  two  narratives  in  Genesis  of  the  creation  of 
Adam,  one  in  the  first  chapter,  the  other  in  the  second, 
the  latter  supplemented  bj  the  account  of  the  origin  of 
woman.  The  first  is  a  part  of  the  great  history  of  the 
world's  creation.  Man  is  represented  as  the  highest  and 
greatest  of  God's  works,  created  at  the  close  of  the  sixth 
day,  made  in  God's  image,  appointed  to  dominion  over 
the  lower  orders,  and  pronounced  "  very  good."  The 
second  account,  which  is  the  composition  of  another 
writer,  the  so-called  Jehovist,  describes  the  method  of 
Adam's  creation.  "  The  Lord  God,"  we  are  told,  "  formed 
man  of  the  dust  of  the  ground,  and  breathed  into  his  nos- 
trils the  breath  of  life  ;  and  man  became  a  living  soul " 
(Gen.  ii.  7).  Then  follows  the  narrative  of  the  creation 
of  woman,  who  \vas  miraculously  produced  from  the  body 
of  the  man. 

If  now  we  look  more  carefully  at  these  two  records  of 
creation,  the  peculiarity  of  man's  nature  and  his  diiference 
from  the  other  orders  of  being  become  evident.  Let  us 
look  first  at  the  account  of  the  second  chapter.  Here 
that  which  distinguishes  man  from  the  lower  orders  of 
animate  beings  is  not  that  he  was  made  from  the  dust  of 
the  earth  ;  the  bodies  of  the  animals  have  the  same  origin 
(Gen.  i.  24,  ii.  19).  The  distinction  does  not  lie  in  the 
fact  that  man  has  in  his  nostrils  the  breath  of  life  ;  the 
same  is  true  of  the  animal  (Gen.  vii.  22).  It  does  not 
consist  in  the  fact  that  man  was  a  living  soul  ;  for  the 
animal  also  is  a  living  soul  (Gen.  i.  24,  Hebrew).  There 
is,  however,  a  distinction,  and  a  very  marked  one.  It 
consists  in  the  immediate  divine  efiiciency,  which  the  ac- 
count so  strongly  emphasizes.  Man  does  not  become  a 
"  living  soul  "  until  the  Lord  God  has  Himself  bi-eathed 


288  PKESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

into  his  nostrils  the  breath  of  life.  Man  is  an  animal  and 
made  like  the  other  animals,  with  this  great  exception, 
that  his  distinctive  principle  is  the  result  of  an  especial 
divine  inbreathing.  In  virtue  of  this  he  is  not  a  mere 
aTiimal,  but  a  "  being  breathing  thoughtful  breath." 
There  is  in  him  a  higher  life  than  that  of  the  animal. 

The  account  of  the  first  chapter  describes  the  same  pe- 
culiarity of  man  by  saying  that  he  was  made  in  God's 
image,  after  His  likeness  (Gen.  i.  26).  The  best  modern 
exegesis  finds  no  difference  between  the  two  terms,  image 
and  likeness,  except  that  the  latter  is  explanatory  of  the 
former.  Man's  distinction  lies  in  the  fact  that  he  was 
made  like  God.  We,  therefore,  ask,  in  what  respects  is 
he  like  God?  In  what  does  the  divine  image  consist? 
There  are  three  methods  by  which  we  niay  answer  this 
question — by  examining  the  later  biblical  teachings  re- 
specting the  nature  of  man,  by  comparing  him  with  the 
animal  and  determining  the  points  in  which  they  differ, 
and  by  comparing  him  with  God  and  'thus  discovering 
the  respects  in  which  they  agree.  These  three  methods 
of  approach  will  all  lead  us  to  the  same  result.  Let  us 
examine  them  in  reverse  order. 

Our  argument  for  the  divine  existence  was  based  upon 
the  truth  that  man  is  like  God.  We  looked  into  our  own 
souls,  and  taking  their  highest  qualities  and  powers,  freed 
them  in  our  thought  from  all  the  imperfection  which  be- 
longs to  our  finite  and  sinful  natures,  and  ascribed  them  to 
the  Infinite  Being.  "  The  descent  into  our  own  souls  is 
the  ascent  to  God."  Now  we  have  to  reverse  the  process. 
We  have  by  the  aid  of  revelation  reached  a  much  higher 
conception  of  God  than  natural  theology  could  give  us. 
Those  qualities  and  powers  in  which  we  resemble  God  are 
His  image  in  us.  Of  course  we  are  not  like  Him  in  His 
infinitude.  Neither  are  we  like  Him  in  His  holiness, 
though  the  first  man  before  the  fall  was  like  Him  in  this 
respect  in  a  sense  in  which  we  cannot  be.    Nor  are  we  like 


I 


MAN-  289 

Him  in  possessing  a  bodily  or  animal  nature.  The  like- 
ness lies  in  the  fact  that  both  God  and  man  are  spirits, 
possessing  the  attributes  of  personality,  freedom,  ration- 
ality, moral  powers,  and  the  capacity  of  love.  Man  is 
like  God  a  personal  being.  lie  knows  himself  as  an  I, 
the  permanent,  indivisible  subject  of  all  his  powers  and 
activities.  His  consciousness  is  seZ/'-consciousness,  He  is 
a  rational  being,  who  knows  what  he  is  and  where  he  is, 
who  looks  before  and  after,  who  knows  the  Infinite  and 
Eternal,  who  has  an  intuitive  knowledge  of  the  true,  the 
beautiful,  and  the  good.  He  is  a  free  being,  who  pos- 
sesses that  sovereign  capacity,  the  power  of  choice.  And 
when  I  speak  of  freedom,  I  do  not  mean  what  the  theo- 
logical and  philosophical  determinists  of  our  time  call  by 
that  name,  that  spontaneity  which  man  possesses  in  com- 
mon with  the  animal.  I  mean  freedom  in  the  true  sense 
of  the  word,  the  ability  to  choose  between  opposite 
courses,  the  power  by  which  character  is  formed  and 
which,  when  rightly  used,  can  bring  men  into  that  higher 
freedom  which  consists  in  the  perfect  conformity  of  the 
will  to  the  law  of  right,  "  the  liberty  of  the  sons  of  God." 
Man  also  is  a  moral  being.  As  free  he  is  under  law, 
and  this  law,  which  is  the  expression  of  the  holy  nature  of 
God,  belongs  to  his  own  nature  in  its  true  idea.  God  and 
man  have  the  same  chief  end,  the  establishment  of  the  di- 
vine kingdom.  Conscience  is  the  never-failing  witness  of 
the  divine  law  and  of  the  righteous  authority  of  Him  in 
whose  image  we  have  been  made.  Lastly,  man  is  like 
God  in  that  he  is  capable  of  those  relations  and  that  atti- 
tude of  will  which  constitute  love.  As  God  in  His  in- 
most nature  is  love,  so  man  is  love,  in  ideal  if  not  in  ac- 
tuality. Love  is  consonant  to  his  nature.  Only  when  he 
loves  God  with  all  his  heart  and  his  neighbor  like  himself, 
does  he  attain  the  completeness  of  the  divine  image.  It 
is  in  this  sense  that  man  is  a  religious  being.  He  is  made 
for  love  to  God  and  that  love  of  God  which  is  bestowed 
19 


290  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

upon  all  who  stand  in  fellowship  and  communion  with 
Ilim, 

We  reach  the  same  result  when  we  examine  the 
characteristics  in  which  man  differs  from  the  animal. 
Man  is  personal ;  the  animal  is  impersonal.  Man  has 
self-consciousnesss  ;  the  animal  has  consciousness,  but  does 
not  know  itself  as  a  self.  Man  is  rational ;  the  brute  is 
irrational,  as  the  Bible  sajs,  "  it  has  no  understanding  " 
(Ps.  xxxii.  9).  Man  is  free,  impulses  and  motives  influence 
him,  but  do  not  control  him  ;  the  animal  is  under  neces- 
sity, its  impulses  are  its  masters.  Man  is  a  moral  being, 
under  law  which  he  has  power  to  obey  or  disobey  ;  the 
animal  is  not  moral,  he  knows  nothing  of  the  law  of  his 
being,  God  works  in  it  to  Avill  and  to  do  of  His  good 
pleasure,  but  it  has  no  power  to  work  out  its  destiny  by  a 
free  and  conscious  co-operation  with  God.  Man  is  cap- 
able of  love ;  the  animal  has  natural  affections  which  are 
prophetic  of  the  higher  exercises  of  man,  but  M'hicli  are 
quite  distinct  from  love.  Man  is  a  religious  being ;  the 
animal  stands  in  no  conscious  relation  to  God. 

The  third  method  of  determining  the  nature  of  the 
divine  image  in  man  is  to  examine  the  scriptural  teach- 
ings respecting  his  peculiar  charactei'istics.  We  must 
make  allowance  here  for  the  fact  that  the  Bible  deals 
chiefly  with  man  as  fallen.  But  we  shall  have  no 
trouble  in  recognizing  the  great  outlines  of  Biblical  doc- 
trine on  this  subject.  The  Bible  teaches  that  man  is  a 
spirit,  a  personal  being,  rational,  free,  moral,  made  for 
love.  These  are  the  attributes  of  humanity  which  make 
him  the  proper  object  of  God's  redemptive  grace,  and 
M'hich  are  to  attain  their  ideal  completeness  in  the  heavenly 
state.  The  conception  of  man  which  is  most  prominent 
in  the  Scriptures,  and  which  most  truly  indicates  his  like- 
ness to  God,  is  that  expressed  by  the  term  sonship.  God 
is  the  Father  of  all  men,  the  heavenly  Father  (Matt.  chh. 
v.-vii.).     Paul,  preaching  to  the  heathen  Athenians,  ap- 


MAN  291 

propriates  the  words  of  the  Greek  poet  Aratiis,  "  We 
are  also  his  offspring  "  (Acts  xvii.  29).  Lnke  calls  Adam 
the  "  son  of  God  "  (iii.  38).  The  common  designation  of 
the  Christian,  who  by  God's  grace  has  begun  to  realize  in 
himself  the  true  idea  of  manhood,  is  a  son  or  child  of 
God.  ISTow,  sonship,  like  the  image,  implies  likeness  to 
God.  The  son  is  of  the  same  nature  with  his  parent, 
possessed  of  the  same  powers,  following  the  same  aims. 
He  is  under  the  parent's  law,  which  is  the  common  law  of 
the  household.  He  stands  in  intercourse  and  communion 
with  his  father.  His  true  relation  to  the  parent  is  one  of 
love,  the  love  of  both.  It  is  one  thing  to  be  a  worh  of 
God,  like  the  animal  or  the  material  thing;  it  is  very  dif- 
ferent to  be  a  son  of  God. 

We  have  thus  come  along  these  three  lines  of  approach 
to  the  same  result.  The  image  of  God  in  man,  by  which 
he  is  fitted  for  his  chief  end,  consists  in  his  spiritual  be- 
ing, his  free  rational  and  moral  personality,  created  in 
love  and  for  love. 

in.  In  what  has  been  said  thus  far,  I  have  implied 
that  man  continues  even  in  his  fallen  state  to  possess  the 
divine  image.  But  it  is  time  that  I  should  to  some  ex- 
tent qualify  my  statements.  Upon  this  point  there  is  a 
wide  divergence  among  the  theologians.  Some,  like 
the  Greek  and  Latin  Fathers,  have  distinguished  between 
the  image  and  the  likeness,  the  former  consisting  in  man's 
rational  nature  and  the  latter  in  his  moral  perfection  ; 
the  likeness  has  been  lost  by  the  Fall  and  only  the  image 
retained.  Othei-s,  like  our  New  England  theologians, 
have  held  that  the  image  consisted  in  the  moral  perfection 
and  that  sin  has  destroyed  it.  The  truer  statement  is 
that  the  image  has  been  retained,  though  marred  and  de- 
faced by  sin.  But  before  this  question  can  be  discussed, 
we  must  consider  another  more  fundamental  matter.  The 
image  of  God  in  man  differs  from  its  archetype  in  God  in 
that  it  is  at  first  an  image  only  partially  realized.     The 


292  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

image  is  a  germ  wliich  is  capable  of  development  and 
which  God  meant  should  develop.  There  is  a  natural 
basis  and  the  potency  and  promise  of  a  complete  achieve- 
ment. The  divine  nature  is  eternally  perfect.  There  is 
no  development  in  God.  His  nature  and  His  character 
are  eternally  the  same.  Not  so  man.  The  divine  image 
given  him  at  the  start  is  an  outline  which  he  is  to  fill  up. 
He  is  made  for  growth.  He  is  to  form  his  own  char- 
acter. He  is  to  build  upon  the  basis  of  his  natural  like- 
ness to  God  a  spiritual  likeness,  wrought  out  by  his  own 
free  will  through  the  freely  imparted  grace  of  God.  His 
natural  sonship  is  to  become  by  his  own  free  choice  and 
the  power  of  God's  Spirit  a  holy  spiritual  sonship.  "We 
jnust  therefore  distinguish  between  the  image  as  original 
endowment  and  the  image  as  destination.  The  two  are 
not  distinct  and  separable.  They  are  different  aspects  of 
the  same  organism,  different  stages  in  its  growth. 

Now,  we  cannot  doubt  that  man  has  retained  the  divine 
image  since  the  Fall.  The  Bible  distinctly  so  declares 
(Gen.  V.  1,  3,  ix.  6  ;  1  Cor.  xi.  7  ;  James  iii.  9).  Son- 
ship,  which  is  equivalent  to  the  image,  remains,  and  God 
is  the  heavenly  Father  even  after  men  have  ceased  to 
recognize  Him  as  such.  Nevertheless  sin  has  come  in  to 
disturb  the  development  of  the  image.  Instead  of  becom- 
ing like  to  God  in  the  free  directions  of  their  wills  to  His 
service,  men  have  turned  from  Him  into  self-service. 
Accordingly,  not  onlj^  has  the  growth  been  checked  and 
perverted,  but  the  natural  basis  of  the  growth  has  been 
affected.  Man  possesses  the  same  godlike  nature  and 
powers  which  God  gave  him  at  first,  but  they  do  not  re- 
tain their  primitive  efficiency.  There  is,  therefore,  a 
true  sense  in  which  we  must  say  that  the  divine  image  in 
us  has  been  defaced.  For  this  reason  there  is  need  of  re- 
demption, and  redemption  will  accomplish  a  twofold 
work  :  it  will  restore  the  image  to  its  pristine  beauty  and 
perfectness,  and  carry  forward  its  development  to  its  com- 


MAN  293 

pletion.  This  is  wliat  is  implied  in  those  New  Testa- 
ment passages  which  represent  it  as  the  work  of  God  in 
Clirist  to  form  the  divine  image  in  us.  There  is  a  "new 
man  which  after  God  has  been  created  in  righteousness 
and  holiness  of  truth  "  Eph.  iv.  24).  It  is  this  new  man, 
"  which  is  being  renewed  onto  knowledge  after  the  image 
of  him  that  created  him"  (Col.  iii.  10). 

lY.  I  pass  to  speak  of  the  relation  in  which  Christ 
stands  to  the  divine  image  in  man.  Attention  has  already 
been  called  to  the  fact  that  man  was  made  for  Christ,  the 
King  of  the  divine  kingdom,  the  Redeemer  of  mankind. 
But  man  was  not  only  made  for  Christ ;  he  was  made  h'l/ 
him.  The  eternal  Logos,  who  became  incarnate,  was  the 
Creator  of  man,  as  he  was  the  Creator  of  the  world. 
Moreover,  he  was  in  his  eternal  Sonship  in  a  peculiar 
sense  the  archetype  of  man.  The  Logos  is  in  his  infinite 
and  eternal  Person  the  image  of  God.  Paul  says  that  he 
is  "  the  image  of  the  invisible  God  "  (Col.  i.  15).  In  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  we  are  told  that  he  is  the  very 
image  of  God's  substance  (i.  3).  The  created  image  of 
God  in  man  is  the  finite  reproduction  of  the  uncreated 
image  of  God  in  the  Logos.  That  Sonship  which  belongs 
to  the  inmost  essence  of  the  Deity  is  mirrored  in  the  son- 
ship  which  belongs  to  the  nature  of  man,  and  which 
reaches  its  full  realization  in  redemption. 

But  even  thus  we  do  not  exhaust  the  relation  of  Christ 
to  the  divine  image  in  man.  The  God  man  in  his  human- 
ity is  called  in  the  New  Testament  the  image  of  God  (2 
Cor.  iv.  4).  He  could  say  to  his  disciples,  "  He  that  hath 
seen  me  hath  seen  the  Father  "  (John  xiv.  9).  In  the  in- 
carnation the  uncreated  imao;e  and  the  created  imao;e  met 
in  perfect  union,  as  perfect  seal  and  perfect  impression. 
The  eternal  Son  wrought  out  in  humanity  a  perfect  hu- 
man sonship,  so  that  the  Christ  is  God's  Son  both  in  his 
divinity  and  his  humanity.  The  divine  image  in  the  hu- 
man Christ  was  perfect  in  its  beginnings,  as  in  Adam,  and 


294  PRESENT   DAT  THEOLOGY 

it  was  made  perfect  in  the  completeness  of  a  hoi}'  devel- 
opment. Accordingl}',  in  Christ  we  have  the  ideal  of  hu- 
manity realized  in  all  its  fulness.  He  is  the  one  perfect 
specimen  of  the  liuman  race.  He  has  shown  us  what  man 
can  be,  and  what  by  God's  grace  he  is  yet  to  be.  Sin  has 
made  all  other  men  imperfect  specimens  of  humanitj'. 
Were  it  not  for  Jesus  Christ  we  might  well  despair  of 
anything  better.  But  the  Second  Adam  has  proved  to 
us  that  our  ideal  is  not  a  mere  imagination.  Thus  he  is 
our  pattern.  Thus  the  blessed  hope  which  redemption 
sets  before  us  is  that  we  shall  be  conformed  to  the  image 
of  Christ,  and  just  so  far  as  redemption  does  its  work  in 
us,  this  hope  is  realized.  "  Whom  he  foreknew,  he  also 
foreordained  to  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son, 
that  he  might  be  the  firstborn  among  many  brethren " 
(Kom.  viii.  29).  "  As  we  have  borne  the  image  of  the 
earthy,  we  shall  also  bear  the  image  of  the  heavenly  "  (1 
Cor.  XV.  49).  "  We  know  that  when  he  shall  appear,  we 
shall  be  like  him  "  (1  John  iii.  2).  This  future  conforma- 
tion to  the  image  of  Christ  is  anticipated  by  God  in  His 
justification  of  the  sinner.  He  sees  in  him  not  the  dis- 
torted image  of  God  which  sin  has  so  sadly  marred,  but 
the  perfect  image  of  the  Saviour  with  whom  he  is  united 
by  faith,  that  image  which  is  finally  to  be  realized  in  all 
its  completeness,  and  for  the  sake  of  the  Saviour  and  his 
work  accepts  him  in  the  fullest  sense  as  His  child. 

Y.  There  are  several  important  questions  touching  the 
relation  of  theology  to  philosophy  and  physical  science, 
which  are  brought  to  our  notice  by  the  doctrine  we  are 
discussing,  and  which  it  would  not  be  right  to  pass  in  en- 
tire silence. 

1.  The  first  concerns  the  elements  of  which  man  is  com- 
posed. Does  revelation  give  any  sanction  to  materialism  ? 
and  if  not,  does  it  tell  us  whether  man's  nature  is  twofold 
or  threefold,  a  dichotomy  or  a  trichotomy  ?  Kow,  there  is 
no  reason  to  believe  that  the  Bible  was  intended  to  teach 


MAN  295 

philosophy  and  science.  "VVe  liave  seen  tliis  to  be  true 
when  dealing  with  the  subject  of  the  world's  creation, 
and  there  is  no  ground  for  introducing  another  principle 
here.  The  attempt  to  extract  from  the  scriptures  an  in- 
spired psychology  is  mere  folly.  The  conceptions  of  hu- 
man nature  found  in  the  Bible  ai-e  the  popular  conceptions 
of  the  various  ages  in  which  the  scriptural  books  were 
written.  Doubtless  a  new  content  was  put  into  these  con- 
ceptions, so  far  as  the  spiritual  truth  which  revelation  has 
to  teach  came  into  contact  with  them.  But  more  than 
this  we  cannot  expect.  Nevertheless,  it  is  not  too  much 
to  say  that  the  scriptural  doctrine  of  man  excludes  cer- 
tain philosophical  doctrines.  As  between  the  materialistic 
and  spiritualistic  theories  of  man,  the  Bible  is  far  from 
being  neutral.  It  unequivocally  teaches  the  existence  of 
a  higher,  spiritual  principle  in  man.  He  is  not  merely 
a  material  being,  but  a  being  in  whom  a  higher  life  is 
present.  In  his  ideal,  man  is  a  nnity,  body  and  spirit  in 
closest  union.  Death,  the  consequence  of  sin,  breaks  this 
unity  for  the  time  ;  but  in  the  resurrection  it  is  to  be  re- 
stored. Between  death  and  the  resurrection  the  spirit  is 
separated  from  the  body.  There  is  a  doctrine  which  has 
in  late  years  acquired  some  prevalence  in  the  Christian 
church,  and  which  is  based  upon  a  materialistic  pllilosoph3^ 
I  refer  to  the  theory  of  "conditional  immortality,"  which 
in  the  form  commonly  held  asserts  the  non-existence  of 
the  soul  between  death  and  the  judgment.  It  finds  a 
certain  support  in  the  teachings  of  some  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment writers,  though  a  careful  study  of  the  passages  shows 
that  it  is  without  satisfactory  foundation.  It  gains  a 
specious  appearance  of  truth  by  the  device  of  interpreting 
the  New  Testament  according  to  the  principles  and  defi- 
nitions which  it  claims  to  find  in  the  Old.  But  its  best 
refutation  is  to  be  found  in  the  violence  which  it  does  to 
all  sober  and  honest  exegesis.  I  shall  speak  of  this  theory 
again  when  we  come  to  eschatology.     It  has  served  the 


296  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

one  good  purpose  of  showing  that  materialism  is  irrecon- 
cilable with  the  teachings  of  revelation.  Indeed,  consis- 
tently carried  out,  it  leads  to  the  subversion  of  revelation 
itself  and  the  denial  of  the  divine  existence. 

Tiie  question  respecting  the  number  of  constituent  ele- 
ments in  man  is  more  difficult,  but  far  less  important. 
The  Bible  terms  are  used  with  great  latitude.  Such 
words  as  body,  flesh,  soul,  heart,  spirit  have  a  well-recog- 
nized central  core  of  meaning,  but  shade  off  into  an  in- 
definite penumbi'a  of  different  significations.  The  most 
that  can  be  claimed  by  the  trichotomists,  who  hold  to  the 
threefold  division  of  human  nature,  namely,  into  body, 
soul,  and  spirit,  is  that  there  is  in  the  Bible  a  general 
usus  loquendi  favoring  their  view.  Their  theory  breaks 
down  the  moment  they  attempt  to  prove  a  uniform  and 
invariable  usage  in  the  Bible.  Nothing  more  seems  to  be 
taught  than  the  naive  conception  of  man  as  consisting  of 
a  body  or  animal  nature  animated  by  a  higher  spiritual 
principle.  The  one  man  may  be  designated  from  either 
side  of  his  being,  as  flesh  or  spirit,  or  with  reference  to 
the  union  of  the  two,  as  soul.  In  the  New  Testament 
somewhat  sharper  distinctions  are  drawn,  and  there  is  an 
approximation  to  our  distinction  between  body  and  soul 
as  two  distinct  and  separable  entities ;  but  even  here  the 
language  is  popular  and  not  philosophical. 

2.  What,  now,  shall  we  say  of  the  relation  of  the  theory 
of  evolution  to  the  scriptural  doctrine  of  man  ?  The 
Bible  gives  a  detailed  account  of  man's  creation ;  the 
theory  of  evolution  denies  creation  and  puts  derivation  by 
descent  through  the  operation  of  natural  selection  in  its 
stead.  The  Bible  attributes  to  man  a  nature  and  powers 
different  from  those  of  the  animal,  not  only  in  degree  but 
in  kind ;  evolution  explains  man's  nature  and  powers  as 
developed  from  those  of  the  animal.  The  Bible  excludes 
materialism  ;  the  theory  of  evolution  seems  to  require  it. 
Now,  with  all  liberality  toward  the  doctrine  of  evolution — 


MAN  297 

and  I  have  enongli  to  believe  that  it  contains  a  vast 
amount  of  truth  and  is  applicable  to  extensive  tracts  of 
nature — I  do  not  think  that  that  form  of  it  which  finds  in 
natural  selection  the  full  explanation  of  man  is  consistent 
with  the  teachings  of  the  Bible.  I  may  be  wrong  in  this 
statement,  and  would  speak  modestly  upon  the  subject.  I 
should  not  wish  to  stake  the  truth  of  Christianity  upon 
the  decision  one  way  or  another  of  a  point  like  this.  But 
it  does  seem  to  me  that  the  Bible,  both  in  the  accounts  of 
man's  creation  and  in  the  later  teachings  respecting  man's 
nature,  attributes  to  him  something  which  differs  heaven- 
wide  from  anything  we  find  in  nature,  and  the  origin  of 
which  cannot  be  explained  by  the  operation  of  the  forces 
and  laws  in  the  spheres  below  man.  Personality,  self- 
consciousness,  rationality,  freedom,  conscience,  the  re- 
ligious nature,  have  some  prophetic  anticipations  in  the 
lower  orders,  but  they  are  in  principle  new.  There  is  a 
gap  between  the  highest  animal  and  the  lowest  man 
which  the  theoiy  of  evolution  is  utterly  incapable  of 
bridoino;  over. 

But  there  is  a  more  modest  application  of  evolution  to 
man  with  respect  to  which  the  theologian's  attitude  is 
very  different.  It  is  that  which  is  made  by  such  men 
as  Wallace,  who  discovered  the  law  of  natural  selection 
contemporaneously  with  Darwin,  by  Mivart,  the  Roman 
Catholic  scientist,  and  by  our  own  distinguished  country- 
man. Professor  Dana.  According  to  this  view,  man's 
lower  nature  is  the  result  of  evolution  by  descent  from 
the  animals,  but  his  higher  spiritual  principle  is  due  to 
a  creative  act  of  God,  supplementing  the  evolution  by 
second  causes.  This  form  of  the  theory  may  be  true  or 
untrue,  but  there  is  nothing  in  the  Bible  to  contradict  it. 
Indeed,  the  account  of  the  creation  in  the  second  chap- 
ter of  Genesis  almost  seems  framed  to  admit  it  :  "  God 
made  man  out  of  the  dust  of  the  gi'ound  " — there  is  the 
evolution,  and  the  divine  making  is  by  providence  rather 


298  PKESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

than  by  creation.  "  And  breathed  into  his  nostrils  the 
breath  of  life  " — there  is  the  creative  act,  the  introduction 
of  the  higher  principle.  "  And  man  became  a  living 
soul " — there  is  the  starting-point  for  the  progress  of  the 
race.  But  I  will  not  say  that  the  writer  of  this  wonder- 
ful story  meant  to  leave  the  way  open  for  any  theory  of 
science ;  he  had  higher  ends  in  view.  All  that  need  be 
said  is,  that  the  way  was  left  open.  It  is  a  matter  of 
small  importance  to  us  whether  or  not  we  are  derived  on 
our  lower  side  from  the  animals.  However  that  may  be, 
we  belong  on  that  side  to  nature.  We  share  one  great  de- 
partment of  our  being  with  the  animals,  the  vegetables, 
and  the  inorganic  world.  We  are  dependent  for  our 
bodily,  and  so  indirectly  for  our  spiritual,  life  upon  the 
world  below.  Every  day  I  am  doing  what  I  can,  as  I  eat 
my  necessary  food,  to  build  up  my  body  out  of  the  flesh 
of  animals  and  the  tissues  of  vegetables  ;  and  why  should  I 
be  so  nice  as  to  shrink  from  the  thought  that  my  ances- 
tor a  thousand  times  removed  was,  as  Darwin  has  de- 
scribed him,  "  a  hairy  quadruped,  furnished  with  a  tail 
and  pointed  ears,  probably  arboreal  in  its  habits,  and 
an  inhabitant  of  the  Old  World  ?  "  ("  Descent  of  Man," 
vol.  ii.,  p.  372).  There  is  nothing  degrading  to  us  in  such 
a  connection  with  the  animal  world.  The  lower  orders 
are  as  God  made  them,  good  for  their  purpose  and  free 
from  moral  evil.  All  that  man  has  to  be  ashamed  of  is 
his  own  sin  and  its  consequences.  In  view  of  this  he 
might  well  hide  his  face  before  God's  unfallen  creatures, 
Jiowever  humble  in  the  scale  of  being.  When  he  shall 
be  redeemed,  he  will  be  glad  to  own  his  relationship  to 
the  dumb  creatures  which  God  has  given  him  to  rule 
over,  and  to  be  their  mouth-piece  to  praise  the  gieat 
Father  who  has  made  them  and  him. 

3.  Another  interesting,  and  in  many  respects  important, 
question  relates  to  the  common  origin  of  man.  The  ac- 
counts of  creation  in  Genesis  seem  to  teach  that  the  race 


MAN  299 

has  descended  from  a  single  pair.  There  are  also  a  num- 
ber of  passages  occurring  later  on  in  the  Bible,  which 
teach  the  same  view  (Gen.  vi.  7,  8,  vii.  21,  viii.  1  seq. ;  Acts 
xvii.  26).  The  scriptural  doctrines  of  the  universal  sinful- 
ness of  man  and  of  redemption  by  Christ  are  based  upon 
the  assumption  of  the  conmion  origin  of  the  human  race. 
This  is  the  teaching  of  Paul  in  the  epistles  to  the  Romans 
and  the  Corinthians,  in  which  he  contrasts  the  first  and 
the  second  Adams  (Rom.  v.  12  seq.;  1  Cor.  xv.  22).  Here 
again  we  should  be  cautious  about  resting  the  weight  of 
the  question  respecting  the  truth  of  revelation  upon  the 
solution  of  such  a  problem  as  this.  Christian  men,  like 
Agassiz,  have  maintained  the  plural  origin  of  mankind, 
and  yet  have  held  to  all  the  essential  truths  of  the  script- 
ural system.  At  the  present  time,  however,  there  can 
scarcely  be  said  to  be  a  conflict  upon  this  point.  Modern 
science  aojrees  with  the  Bible  in  teachino;  the  common  ori- 
gin  of  the  race.  Anatomy  and  physiology  teach  the 
specific  unity  of  man.  Ethnology  points  to  one  original 
fountain-head,  probably  in  Central  Asia,  from  which  all 
the  streams  of  human  emigration  have  flowed.  The  sci- 
ence of  religion  discloses  common  traditions  and  mytholo- 
gies. The  science  of  language  exhibits  a  convergence  to- 
ward a  common  center  of  the  various  languages  of  man- 
kind. Finally,  the  theory  of  evolution  speaks  through 
Professor  Huxley  in  favor  of  the  monogenistic  view  :  "  I 
am  one  of  those,"  he  says,  "  who  believe  that  at  present 
there  is  no  evidence  whatever  for  saying  that  mankind 
sprang  originally  from  any  more  than  a  single  pair*" 
("  Origin  of  Species,"  Lecture  Y.). 

4.  Finally,  the  question  arises  respecting  the  origin  of 
the  individual  soul.  Three  theories  have  been  held.  The 
first,  and  the  one  which  has  had  the  widest  currency,  is 
that  which  ascribes  each  soul  to  a  distinct  creative  act  of 
God.  Another,  which  bears  the  name  of  Traducianism, 
maintains  that  the  germ  of  the  soul  is  passed  from  parent 


300  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

to  child  at  the  same  time  with  tlie  genu  of  the  body, 
and  after  a  similar  manner.  Still  anothei-  view,  which 
was  held  by  Origen  in  the  third  century  and  can  count  a 
few  distinguished  modern  theologians  in  its  favor,  claims 
for  the  soul  a  pre  existent  state  in  another  world  before  it 
entered  upon  the  experiences  of  this  life ;  according  to  it, 

"  Our  birth  is  but  a  sleep  and  a  forgetting." 

But  revelation  is  wisely  silent  npon  this  subject.  We 
are  at  perfect  liberty,  so  far  as  its  teachings  are  concerned, 
to  hold  whichever  of  the  three  theories  most  commends 
itself  to  our  reason.  Probably  the  majoiity  of  Christians 
will  always  favor  some  form  of  the  first-mentioned  view, 
or  Creationism,  as  it  is  commonly  called.  Even  though 
they  may  be  willing  to  admit  that  there  is  no  such  creative 
activity  as  produced  the  first  man,  still  they  will  prefer  to 
believe  that  the  divine  power  is  active  in  the  origin  of 
each  new  spirit  in  a  more  special  way  than  when  other 
things  come  into  existence.  We  cannot  but  believe  that 
there  is  in  each  human  being  something  altogether  new, 
that  as  each  man's  life  is  "  a  plan  of  God,"  so  each  man 
himself  possesses  a  special  divine  endowment  springing 
from  a  special  divine  originative  act,  which  we  can  only 
designate  by  the  term  creative. 

As  man  is  the  highest  and  noblest  of  earthly  creatures, 
so  his  creation  fitly  finishes  the  symphony  of  creation, 
"  the  diapason  closing  full  in  man."  What  honor  God 
has  bestowed  upon  him  and  what  love !  What  meaning 
there  is  in  those  words,  "  God  so  loved  the  world  that  he 
gave  his  only-begotten  Son  "  (John  iii.  IG). 

Thus  far,  while  recognizing  the  existence  of  sin,  we 
have  dwelt  chiefly  upon  the  ideal  aspects  of  man's  nature. 
In  our  next  chapter  we  shall  pass  to  the  consideration  of 
that  abuse  of  freedom  which  has  wrouglit  such  havoc  in 
God's  fair  creation. 


XYII. 

THE   NATURE  AND  GUILT  OP  SIN 

The  guiding  principle  of  onr  discussions  thus  far  has 
been  the  doctrine  of  the  redemptive  kingdom  of  God. 
This  doctrine,  as  we  have  liad  repeated  occasion  to  observe, 
implies  the  existence  of  sin  in  the  world.  God  was  not 
surprised  by  the  entrance  of  sin  ;  it  was  not  forced  against 
His  will  into  the  sphere  of  His  moral  government.  He 
intentionally  permitted  it,  because  He  meant  to  turn  it 
against  itself  and  make  it  subservient  to  His  grace.  We 
have  now  reached  the  point  where  we  must  give  especial 
attention  to  this  subject  of  sin,  and  we  shall  still  find  in 
the  doctrine  of  the  redemptive  kingdom  the  clew  to  guide 
us  through  its  intricacies.  I  am  anxious  that  we  should 
avoid  the  mistake,  into  which  theologians  have  too  often 
fallen,  of  treating  sin  merely  in  its  philosophical  aspects 
or  as  a  fact  of  natural  theology.  There  is  no  truth  in  the 
theological  system  which  has  a  more  distinctively  Christian 
character.  It  finds  no  adequate  expression  outside  of 
Christianity.  Sin  has  darkened  the  soul  in  nothing  more 
than  in  the  knowledge  of  itself.  The  fact,  it  is  true,  is 
patent.  All  religions,  all  philosophies  recognize  the  ex- 
istence of  moral  evil.  But  we  seek  to  know  something 
more  of  it  than  the  mere  fact  of  its  existence,  and  it  is  not 
until  we  view  it  in  the  light  which  the  Christian  revelation 
has  thrown  upon  it  and  see  its  relation  to  God's  kingdom, 
that  we  discover  its  true  nature  and  meaning. 

I.  Standing,  then,  upon  the  vantage-ground  of  the  re- 
demptive revelation,  we  ask,  What  is  sin  ?     The   answer 


30-2  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

may  be  given  in  few  words.  It  is  the  deviation  of  man^s 
will  from  his  chief  end.  In  the  last  chapter  we  had  the 
subject  of  the  chief  end  brought  clearly  before  us.  The 
great  end  of  God's  purpose  and  actions  is  the  final  object 
of  man's  existence.  He  was  made  for  the  kingdom  of 
God.  He  fulfils  the  divine  intention  in  creating  him 
when  he  "  seeks  first  the  kingdom  of  God  and  his 
righteousness."  It  is  his  duty  as  a  rational  being,  pos- 
sessed of  moral  knowledge  and  freedom,  to  set  this  chief 
end  always  before  him  and  to  pursue  it  constantly  and  un- 
deviatingly.  The  way  to  the  attainment  of  his  proper  end 
is  a  straight  path  turning  neither  to  the  right  nor  to  the 
left.  Now,  so  far  as  the  human  will  does  not  follow  this 
path,  so  far  as  it  turns  to  either  side  in  its  choices  and 
volitions,  it  sins.  It  is  interesting  to  notice  that  the  He- 
brew word  most  frequently  employed  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment to  convey  the  idea  of  sin,  and  its  Greek  counterpart 
in  the  New  Testament,  both  signify  to  miss  the  mark  ;  sin 
is  wrong  aiming  of  the  choice  and  a  wrong  direction  of 
the  act. 

This  general  definition  of  sin  may  be  further  explained, 
if  we  consider  the  subject  from  two  different  points  of 
view,  negatively  and  positively,  in  what  it  is  not  and  what 
it  is. 

Viewed  negatively,  sin  is  disobedience  to  the  divine 
will.  This  is  essentially  the  same  as  the  definition  already 
given.  For  the  kingdom  of  God  is  realized  wherever  the 
divine  will  is  accomplished.  Our  Saviour  has  taught  us 
to  pray,  "  Thy  kingdom  come.  Thy  will  be  done  in  earth 
as  it  is  in  heaven  "  (Matt.  vi.  10).  But  when  God's  will 
is  disobeyed,  the  kingdom  is  hindered  ;  the  sinner  is  not  a 
filial  subject  of  the  King,  but  a  rebel.  It  is  the  same 
thing  when  we  say,  in  the  words  of  the  Assembly's  Cate- 
chism, that  "  Sin  is  any  want  of  conformity  unto,  or  trans- 
gression of,  the  law  of  God."  The  law  is  the  expression 
of  the  divine  will  as  the  rule  of  human  conduct.     In  it 


THE   NATURE   ATs'D   GUILT   OF   SIN  303 

God's  will  lays  its  righteous  demands  upon  man's  Mall. 
The  chief  end  and  the  means  by  which  it  is  to  be  attained 
form  the  subject-matter  of  the  law.  Its  great  outlines  are 
written  upon  the  heart  of  every  man,  and  are  witnessed  by 
the  voice  of  conscience.  Paul  has  shown  in  the  first  two 
chapters  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  that  even  the 
heathen  have  this  general  knowledge  of  the  law,  so  that 
they  are  "  without  excuse  "  in  their  sin.  But  the  law  finds 
a  far  fuller  exposition  in  the  redemptive  revelation.  The 
first  efforts  of  revelation  were  directed  to  the  deepening  in 
men  of  the  sense  of  sin,  and  the  divine  law  is  taught 
more  and  more  fully  from  the  days  of  Moses  onward,  till 
we  reach  the  complete  spiritual  statement  of  it  in  the  Ser- 
mon on  the  Mount.  The  law  is  the  rule  by  which  we 
measure  the  moral  state  of  man.  Whatever  does  not  con- 
form to  it,  whatever  in  any  way  transgresses  it,  is  sin. 

But  we  must  be  careful  lest  this  definition  of  sin  lead 
us  into  inadequate,  and  so  false,  conceptions  of  its  nature. 
The  term  law  is  employed  by  many  in  such  a  sense  as 
to  give  a  ver}^  different  meaning  to  it  from  that  which 
the  Bible  teaches.  It  is  used  impersonally,  to  designate 
merely  the  inherent  principle  of  human  conduct.  As  a 
force,  or  a  material  substance,  or  an  organism,  have  each 
tlieir  law,  that  is,  their  established  mode  of  operation,  so 
has  man.  'Now,  let  me  not  be  misunderstood.  I  do  not 
deny  that  the  term  law  may  be  rightly  used  in  this  sense, 
or  that  any  deviation  from  this  law  is  sin.  What  I  affirm 
is,  that  the  complete  meaning  of  the  term  will  carry  us 
far  deeper.  Our  Saviour,  basing  his  teachings  upon  the 
precepts  of  the  Old  Testament,  summed  up  the  law  in  the 
two  great  commandments,  "  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy 
God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and  with  all 
thy  mind,"  and  "Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself  " 
(Matt.  xxii.  37-39).  But  this  exposition  of  the  law  car- 
ries us  above  the  commandment  to  the  personal  God  who 
commancls  and  reveals  to  us  the  fact  that  our  true  relation 


304  PEESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

to  Him  is  one  of  love,  that  is,  one  of  fellowship  and  com- 
munion, of  love  on  His  side,  as  well  as  obedience  and  love 
on  ours.  He  has  made  God  known  to  us  as  our  Father, 
who  has  crowned  us  with  loving  kindness  and  tender  mer- 
cies. Moreover,  he  has  revealed  to  us  the  divine  grace  in 
redemption  :  "  God  so  loved  the  world  that  he  gave  his 
oniy-begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  believeth  on  him 
should  not  perish  but  have  eternal  life  "  (John  iii.  16).  It 
is  this  Father,  this  God  of  grace,  yea,  even  it  is  this  Sav- 
iour himself,  who  speaks  to  us  in  the  law,  and  who  reveals 
His  will  by  His  Spirit  and  providence,  calling  us  to  spe- 
cial services  in  His  kingdom.  Here  is  a  present  God,  to 
whom  that  redemptive  kingdom  which  is  our  chief  end  is 
dear  above  all  things,  who  is  bound  to  us  by  tenderer  ties 
than  our  dearest  earthly  friend.  Now,  sin  is  in  its  deepest 
meaning  the  rejection  of  this  God.  It  is  disobedience  to 
our  Father,  alienation  from  Him,  rejection  of  that  son- 
ship  which  is  ours  by  birthright.  It  involves  a  rupture  of 
the  state  of  communion  with  God.  It  means  going  out  of 
the  Father's  house  and  into  the  far  country.  In  the  case 
of  those  who  know  Christ  and  the  grace  of  redemption 
which  has  come  to  us  through  him,  it  means  the  rejection 
of  this  utmost  manifestation  of  love  and  mercy.  In  a 
word,  it  means  all  that  wrong  and  wretchedness  which 
Jesus  has  pictured  in  that  most  wonderful  of  all  stories, 
the  parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son.  I  do  not  mean  that  one 
need  go  so  far  as  the  Prodigal  did  in  order  to  become  a 
sinner.  What  I  assert  is  that  in  every  sin,  be  it  small  or 
great,  this  element  is  present,  this  rejection  of  the  Father's 
love,  this  disobedience  to  the  Father's  will.  It  may  even 
go  so  far  as  to  become  that  enmity  to  God,  of  which  the 
Apostle  speaks  in  the  eighth  chapter  of  Romans  (v.  7). 

So  far  we  have  looked  at  sin  upon  the  negative  side, 
considering  its  opposition  to  the  true  manhood.  But  we 
shall  not  understand  it  fully  until  we  have  also  examined 
its  positive  side.     Thus  considered,  sin  may  be  defined  as 


THE   NATURE   AND   GUILT   OF   SIN  305 

selfishness.  We  say  it  is  positive  because  it  does  not 
merely  consist  in  a  deviation  of  the  will  from  the  chief 
end  of  man,  but  the  setting  of  a  wrong  chief  end.  We 
were  made  for  the  kingdom  of  God ;  bnt  it  is  possible  for 
us  to  usurp  the  place  that  belongs  to  God  and  put  Self 
upon  the  throne.  It  is  our  duty  to  love  God  supremely  ; 
but  it  is  possible  to  love  ourselves  supremely.  It  is  just 
this  that  every  sinner  does,  just  in  so  far  as  he  sins.  He 
makes  himself  the  center  around  which  his  moral  life  re- 
volves. Instead  of  following  the  law  of  love,  which  finds 
its  highest  blessedness  in  giving,  he  follows  the  law  of 
selfishness,  which  finds  its  highest  blessedness,  or  thinks  it 
does,  in  taking.  In  saying  that  sin  consists  in  selfishness, 
I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  all  self-love  is  sin.  There  is  a 
true  love  of  self  which  is  not  only  commendable  but  ob- 
ligatory. We  find  it  recognized  in  the  command'  to  love 
our  neighbor  as  ourself.  But  the  true  self-love  is  subor- 
dinate to  the  love  of  God.  It  views  self  as  an  instru- 
ment of  God  in  the  establishment  of  His  kingdom.  It 
finds  its  own  chief  end  in  God's  chief  end.  But  selfish- 
ness puts  the  love  of  self  before  the  love  of  God.  It 
seeks  to  attain  a  false  independence  by  going  outside  of 
the  sphere  of  the  divine  kingdom.  It  puts  God  second. 
Herein  lies  the  inherent  falsity  of  sin.  It  does  not  gain 
what  it  seeks,  it  does  not  find  the  blessedness  it  promises 
itself.  Selfishness  is  not  really  self-love ;  rightly  under- 
stood, it  is  self-hatred.  It  is  a  vaulting  ambition  which 
o'erreaches  itself.  For  man  has  only  one  chief  end,  and 
the  chief  end  which  sin  substitutes  does  not  take  its  place, 
but  brings  only  disappointment  and  sorrow.  This  is  why 
the  Bible  so  often  calls  sin  folly  and  the  sinner  a  fool.  A 
fool  is  a  man  who  thinks  he  is  getting  everything  when  in 
reality  he  is  throwing  away  everything ;  he  gains  the 
whole  world  and  loses  his  own  soul ;  he  is  like  the  foolish 
dog  in  the  fable,  who  loses  the  meat  from  his  mouth  as  he 

snaps  at  the  meat  of  the  dog  reflected  in  the  water.     In 
20 


806  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

all  sin,  be  it  great  or  little,  there  is  tliis  selfishness — and 
this  folly. 

Before  we  leave  this  branch  of  our  subject,  1  Avish 
briefly  to  refer  to  the  light  thrown  upon  this  question  of 
sin  by  the  person  and  life  of  Jesus  Christ.  In  him  we 
liave  a  perfect  specimen  of  holy  manhood,  and  therefoie 
he  is  the  standard  by  which  we  may  measure  other  men. 
Accordingly,  Christlikeness  is  holiness  and  un-Christlike- 
ness  is  sin.  Whatever  in  the  character  and  life  falls 
short  of  "  the  measure  of  the  stature  of  the  fulness  of 
Christ "  (Eph.  iv.  13)  is  unholy.  When  we  make  the  or- 
dinary manhood  of  the  world  about  us  our  standard  and 
compare  ourselves  with  each  other,  we  may  seem  good 
enough.  J3ut  when  we  place  our  lives  alongside  of 
Christ's,  the  case  is  different.  There  is  a  taint  of  sin  in 
our  best  deeds.  Even  those  theologians  who  teach  that 
some  Ch]'istians  attain  perfection  in  this  life,  hesitate  to 
declare  that  it  is  such  a  perfection  as  belonged  to  the  Sav- 
ioui".  In  all  normal  Christian  experience  increased  knowl- 
edge of  Christ  brings  a  deeper  sense  of  sin,  and  a  more 
vivid  realization  of  its  extent  and  power. 

II.  We  have  next  to  seek  the  essential  principle  of  sin. 
The  definitions  already  given  show  us  wliat  it  is.  Isow 
we  inquire  concerning  its  soui'ce.  Upon  this  point  a 
variety  of  theories  have  been  held  by  theologians.  Some 
liave  endeavored  to  explain  the  existence  of  sin  by  a 
dualistic  theory  of  the  universe.  Over  against  the  holy 
God  is  a  Principle  of  Evil,  to  which  all  sin  is  to  be  as- 
cribed. Commonly  this  view,  which  found  typical  ex- 
pression in  the  manicheism  of  the  early  Christian  church, 
is  associated  with  a  doctrine  of  the  intrinsic  evil  of  matter. 
Sin  is  therefore  incident  to  this  earthly  life,  in  which  the 
soul  is  entangled  in  a  material  body  and  thus  for  the 
time  separated  from  God,  its  true  source  and  life.  But 
the  Bible  gives  no  countenance  to  such  a  view  as  this. 
God  is  supreme  in  His  universe.     Satan,  though  powerful 


THE   NATURE   AND    GUILT   OF   SIN  307 

and  capable  of  doing  great  mischief,  is  a  finite  being, 
created  by  God  and  wliolly  under  His  control.  Matter  is 
not  evil,  but  good  ;  it  becomes  evil  only  as  it  comes  under 
the  influence  of  sin.  Another  theory  ascribes  sin  to  the 
sensuous  nature  of  man,  that  is,  his  lower  or  animal  nat- 
ure, the  flesh,  as  distinguished  from  the  spirit.  But  this 
explanation  also  is  unsatisfactory.  The  animal  nature  is 
good  in  itself.  When  the  eternal  Word  became  flesh 
(John  i.  14),  and  lived  a  perfect  human  life  in  the  flesh, 
he  proved  that  there  is  nothing  intrinsically  evil  in  it.  It 
is  true  that  the  sensuous  nature  of  man  is  the  source  of 
many  of  his  sins,  but  it  is  also  true  that  the  worst  sins 
emanate  from  the  higher  nature.  The  worst  villains,  the 
lagos  for  example,  are  free  from  the  sins  of  the  flesh.  It 
is  true,  too,  that  Paul  ascribes  inherent  sinfulness  to  the 
flesh  ;  but  Paul  uses  the  term  not  to  designate  the  lower 
nature  of  man  as  it  is  in  itself,  but  the  whole  man  in  so 
far  as  he  is  under  the  influence  of  sin.  It  is  not  the  flesh 
which  is  the  cause  of  sin,  but  sin  which  has  corrupted  the 
flesh,  as  it  has  corrupted  the  whole  man.  Still  another 
explanation  finds  the  essential  principle  of  sin  in  the 
finiteness  of  man.  This  view  has  taken  various  forms. 
At  present  it  finds  expression  in  the  popular  evolutionary 
philosophy — which,  let  me  say,  as  I  have  done  before,  is 
always  to  be  carefully  distinguished  from  the  more  modest 
scientific  theory  of  evolution.  According  to  this  view, 
sin  is  a  necessary  stage  in  human  development.  It  is 
partially  evolved  conduct.  It  belongs  to  a  period  when 
man  is  only  partially  conformed  to  his  environment. 
There  is  in  it  nothing  intrinsically  evil.  It  will  more  and 
more  disappear  as  the  process  of  evolution  goes  on. 
"  Paul,"  said  a  witty  English  clergyman  (Dr.  Kaleigh), 
"cried  out  in  his  deep  consciousness  of  sin,  '  O  wretched 
man  that  I  am,  who  shall  deliver  me  from  the  body  of 
this  death  ! '  Our  modern  philosophers,  with  their  new 
ethics,  exclaim,  boastfully,  '  O  progressive  creature  that  I 


308  PEESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

am,  who  shall  help  me  to  evolve  mj^self ! ' "  But  this 
theory  is  as  incompetent  as  the  other  to  furnish  ns  with 
the  real  principle  of  sin.  Sin  is  not  normal  but  abnormal. 
It  indicates  not  progress  but  retrogression.  The  natural 
man  becomes  no  holier  in  the  progress  of  evolution.  Sin 
becomes  in  many  respects  worse  as  the  world  grows  older. 
The  world  as  a  whole  is  doubtless  far  better  than  it  M'as  a 
thousand  years  ago,  but  the  civilized  sinner  who  has  fallen 
heir  to  all  the  benefits  of  human  evolution  is  worse  than 
the  savage  sinner. 

There  is  one  explanation,  and  only  one,  of  the  origin  of 
sin  which  is  satisfactory.  It  is  that  which  ascribes  it  to 
the  abuse  of  human  freedom.  Its  essential  principle  is  to 
be  found  in  the  perversion  of  one  of  God's  best  gifts. 

In  order  that  we  may  understand  what  this  means,  let 
ns  look  more  carefully  at  this  subject  of  freedom.  We  use 
the  term  in  several  different  senses,  TIius  we  say  a  man 
is  free  when  no  constraint  is  laid  upon  him  from  without. 
Tliis  is  what  is  called  freedom  of  action  It  is  the  kind  of 
freedom  of  which  the  slave  is  deprived  and  for  which  he 
sighs,  the  fi'eedom  for  which  the  prisoner  longs,  the  liberty 
M'hich  the  patriot  dies  to  defend.  Then  there  is  what  is 
called  "  real  freedom,"  or,  as  the  Bible  calls  it,  "  the  free- 
dom of  the  sons  of  God."  This  consists  in  holiness,  in 
conformity  to  our  chief  end.  The  Christian  is  free,  be- 
cause he  is  going  forward  in  the  path  in  which  he  was 
made  to  move,  while  the  sinner  is  a  slave  because  he  is 
subverting  his  true  end  and  has  brought  conflict  and  con- 
fusion into  his  moral  life  by  leaving  the  path  for  which 
lie  was  destined.  But  when  we  speak  of  sin  as  originating 
in  the  abuse  of  freedom,  we  nse  the  term  in  neither  of 
these  senses.  We  mean  by  it  that  power  of  choice  which 
is  the  characteristic  of  man  as  a  lational  and  moral  being, 
and  in  virtue  of  which  he  is  able  to  determine  to  which  of 
the  various  ends  or  objects  of  action  which  are  presented 
to  him  he  will  direct  his  enei'^ies.     The  brute  is  moved 


THE   NATURE   AND   GUILT   OF   SIN  309 

bj  impulses  operating  from  behind.  lie  has  no  choice  in 
tlie  true  sense  of  the  word.  But  man  sees  before  him  the 
ends  of  action.  He  understands  their  nature.  He  has 
his  bearings  in  the  universe,  and,  as  we  say,  "knows  what 
he  is  about."  There  ai-e  impulses  in  him  as  in  the  animal, 
which  impel  him  toward  certain  ends,  but  he  is  able  to 
hold  them  in  check  while  he  deliberates  intelligently  upon 
the  nature  of  these  ends  and  chooses  between  them.  The 
brute  is  governed  by  his  impulses ;  the  man  governs  his 
impulses,  or  has  the  power  to  do  it. 

In  motives  which  impel  men  toward  action  there  is  an 
element  of  impulse,  but  it  is  transformed  by  the  presence 
of  a  higher  rational  element.  We  are  not  compelled  by 
motives.  It  is  indeed  true  that  no  rational  action  is  pos- 
sible without  motives,  but  the  choice  from  which  the  ac- 
tion proceeds  is  made  in  view  of  motives  and  on  the  ground 
of  them,  but  not  because  of  them.  The  efficient  cause  of 
choice  is  not  the  motive  but  the  free  man  himself.  De- 
terminism denies  this.  It  says  that  the  motives  are  the 
efficient  causes  of  action.  The  difference  between  the  man 
and  the  brute,  according  to  the  determinist,  is  that  the 
man  has  reason  and  conscience  while  the  brute  has  neither, 
but  otherwise  their  action  is  the  same.  Determinism  uses 
the  word  freedom,  but  means  by  it  merely  freedom  of 
action,  not  freedom  of  choice.  Jonathan  Edwards  asks, 
whether  it  is  not  freedom  enough  to  be  able  to  do  as  we 
please  ?  Dr.  ]^athaniel  Taylor,  who  taught  the  freedom 
of  the  will  in  the  full  meaning  of  the  term,  replied,  No — 
in  order  to  be  free,  a  man  must  be  able  not  only  to  do  as 
he  pleases  but  to  do  as  he  doesn't  please.  The  beast  does 
as  he  pleases.  But  the  beast's  spontaneity  is  not  freedom. 
I  emphasize  this  point,  because  in  our  day  the  di'ift  of 
philosophical  and  scientific  thought  is  toward  determin- 
ism, and  there  are  evidences  that  the  tendency  in  theology, 
which  has  for  the  last  generation  been  in  the  other  direc- 
tion, is  beginning  to  follow  the  popular  current.     It  is  a 


310  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

significant  and  not  altogether  edifying  circumstance  that 
we  hear  theologians  appealing  to  Mill  and  Spencer  in  sup- 
port of  a  doctrine  of  freedom,  which  is  really  a  doctrine  of 
necessity,  paltering  with  us  in  a  double  sense,  while  scien- 
tific necessitarians  like  Professor  Huxley  piously  aver  that 
they  are  orthodox  followers  of  Jonathan  Edwards.  And 
yet  I  do  not  hesitate  to  affirm  that  upon  the  maintenance 
of  the  doctrine  of  man's  true  freedom  depend  some  of  the 
most  precious  truths  of  ethics  and  theology.  Without 
freedom  there  can  be  no  such  thing  as  responsibility,  holi- 
ness, sin,  guilt,  grace,  punishment.  I  am  not  sure  that  I 
might  not  go  farther  and  affirm  that  the  rational  proof  of 
the  divine  existence  is  impossible,  except  as  we  reason 
from  a  finite  personality,  and  therefore,  from  a  free  per- 
sonality (for  there  can  be  no  such  thing  as  personality 
without  freedom)  to  an  Infinite  Personality. 

We  are  free.  But  we  have  been  made  so  with  a  pur- 
pose, Man  has  his  law  as  well  as  the  brute.  But  while 
the  brute  follows  his  law  with  necessitj^,  moved  by  the 
ms  a  tergo  of  irrational  impulse,  man  has  been  so  consti- 
tuted that  he  is  only  under  obligation  to  follow  his  law, 
not  under  necessit3\  He  is  to  do  it  rationallj'  and  freely, 
without  constraint,  from  love  to  the  good  and  God. 
Herein  consists  the  pre-eminence  and  excellency  of  man, 
and  the  wisdom,  power,  and  love  of  God  are  manifest  in 
the  creation  of  such  a  being.  God  would  have  some 
creatures  in  His  universe  who  would  serve  Him  freely. 
But  let  the  fact  be  emphasized  that  man  was  made  free 
tliat  he  might  use  his  freedom  aright.  He  was  made  for 
the  kingdom  of  God.  Nevertheless,  this  freedom  to  attain 
his  chief  end,  to  love  and  serve  God,  from  the  nature  of  the 
case  involved  a  power  to  the  contrary.  Instead  of  using 
his  power  of  choice  aright,  as  God  intended  he  should, 
man  may  use  it  wrongly.  Instead  of  employing  his  free- 
dom to  choose  in  such  a  way  as  to  attain  that  real  free- 
dom which  is  the  liberty  of  the  sons  of  God,  he  can  so 


THE   JSTATUKE   AND   GUILT   OF   SIN  311 

use  it  as  to  sell  himself  into  the  slavery  of  sin.  Now  iu 
this  abuse  of  freedom,  this  using  of  it  for  wrong  and  self- 
ish ends,  lies  the  essential  principle  of  sin.  It  is  the  per- 
version of  a  power  given  for  good  ends.  We  need  go  no 
farther  than  the  will  of  man  to  explain  it.  I  shall  show 
hereafter  that  our  inherited  tendencies  and  our  sinful  en- 
vironment play  their  part  in  seducing  the  will  to  sin,  but, 
the  real  causality  lies  in  the  will  itself,  or  rather  iu  the 
man  who  exercises  the  will,  and  the  true  explanation  of 
the  sin  is  to  be  found  in  his  wrong  choice.  Before  leaving 
this  branch  of  our  subject,  let  me  say  that  in  asserting 
that  God  gave  man  his  freedom  that  he  might  use  it  to 
attain  his  chief  end,  I  have  uttered  nothing  inconsistent 
with  the  fact  that  God  knew  that  men  would  sin  and  or- 
dained to  permit  them  to  sin.  So  far  as  sin  has  a  place  in 
the  divine  plan,  it  is  in  its  true  nature  as  wholly  due  to 
man  and  not  at  all  to  God.  God  has  made  man  to  be 
good,  and  that  he  is  not  good  is  his  own  fault.  In  thus 
speaking  of  man's  destination,  we  speak  of  man  as  he- 
ought  to  be.  The  divine  plan  includes  not  only  what 
ought  to  be,  but  what  is. 

III.  A  distinction  is  commonly  and  justly  made  by  the- 
ologians between  sin  as  a  permanent  state  of  the  will  and 
the  manifestation  of  that  state  in  individual  acts  of  trans- 
gression. It  is  to  the  latter  that  the  term  "  actual  sin  "  is 
applied,  designating  not  real  sin  as  opposed  to  imaginary 
sins,  but  the  sin  of  act  as  opposed  to  the  state  of  sin  from 
which  it  proceeds.  To  properly  appreciate  this  distinc- 
tion, we  must  enter  somewhat  more  deeply  than  we  have 
done  into  the  subject  of  the  will  and  its  freedom.  There 
are  two  different  functions  of  the  will  to  which  the 
psychologist  calls  our  attention,  the  one  choice,  the  other 
volition.  In  choice  we  select  one  of  the  various  objects 
or  ends  of  action  as  that  toward  which  we  will  direct  our 
energies.  In  volition  we  put  forth  energy  for  the  attain- 
ment of  the  chosen   end.     The  choice   of   itself   brings 


312  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

nothing  to  pass ;  it  belongs  purely  to  the  soul.  The  voli- 
tion is  what  brings  to  pass,  and  it  has  the  power  to  pro- 
duce effects  beyond  the  soul.  I  choose  to  sing  a  hymn, 
but  I  do  not  sing  until  I  liave  put  forth  a  volition,  which 
in  some  mysterious  way  sets  the  machinery  of  the  brain 
and  nerves  and  the  muscles  of  the  vocal  apparatus  in  oper- 
ation. Now  freedom  belongs  primarily  and  directly  to 
the  region  of  choice.  Volition  may  be  abortive,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  paralytic  or  the  prisoner  w4io  is  under  out- 
ward constraint,  but  the  choice  is  free  and  no  constraint  of 
body  or  other  outward  power  can  affect  it.  Yet  choice 
has  its  limitations  and  its  laws.  The  popular  idea  of  free- 
dom is  that  it  is  an  ability  to  choose  at  any  moment  in 
any  way.  But  this  is  far  from  being  the  fact.  Our  full 
freedom  is  exercised  in  only  a  comparatively  few  cases  of 
choice,  while  in  the  common  choices  that  we  are  com- 
pelled daily  and  momently  to  make,  we  exercise  only  a 
modicum  of  freedom. 

In  order  to  bring  this  fact  before  us  let  us  avail 
ourselves  of  a  distinction  current  among  philosophers, 
between  ultimate,  subordinate,  and  supreme  ends  of  ac- 
tion, and  the  choices  which  correspond  to  them.  An  ul- 
timate end  is  one  that  is  in  some  sense  an  end  in  itself ; 
it  is  one  that  dominates  an  extensive  department  of  our 
lives,  as,  for  example,  t^lie  profession  or  business  a  man 
pursues  is  an  ultimate  end  of  his  action.  A  subordinate 
end  is  one  that  is  a  means  to  an  ulterior  or  ultimate  end, 
as,  for  example,  a  journey  to  a  distance,  which  a  man  of 
business  has  in  contemplation,  is  an  end  subordinate  to  the 
great  end  which  his  business  furnishes.  A  supreme  end 
is  the  highest  ultimate  end.  In  strictness  there  is  only 
one  supreme  end,  the  chief  end  of  man,  which  is  the  king- 
dom of  God  ;  but,  as  we  have  seen,  a  man  may  make  him- 
self his  supreme  end.  ISIow  our  choices  correspond  to 
these  ends  and  vary  according! 3'.  As  the  ultimate  ends  of 
life  are  comparatively  few,  so  our  ultimate   choices  are 


THE   NATUKE   AND   GUILT   OF   SIN  313 

few.  The  great  majority  of  our  choices  are  concerned  with 
subordinate  ends.  The  supreme  choice  is  narrowed  down 
to  the  one  issue,  God  or  Self.  Freedom  is  exercised  chief- 
ly in  our  ultimate  choices,  and  especially  in  the  supreme 
choice.  It  is  the  peculiarity  of  these  choices  that  while 
they  may  be  made  in  a  moment,  they  extend  over  long 
periods,  the  supreme  choice  being  a  choice  for  eternity. 
They  are  what  we  call  permanent  choices.  They  begin  as 
acts  of  choice,  but  they  are  maintained  as  states  of  choice. 
A  man  chooses  a  profession.  It  is  a  choice  for  life.  He 
remains,  so  long  as  he  pursues  the  profession,  in  a  perma- 
nent state  of  choice.  In  this  state  he  is  not  only  free,  but 
it  is  the  highest  exercise  of  freedom.  ]^ow  all  the  daily 
choices  which  this  man  makes  with  respect  to  things  in 
any  way  connected  with  his  profession  are  subordinate  to 
this  main  choice,  which  is  always  present.  You  go  to  one 
man  and  say,  "  Come  with  me  ;  I  want  to  show  you  a  fos- 
sil which  has  just  been  found  in  a  quarry  a  couple  of  miles 
away."  He  answers,  "  ]^o,  I  cannot ;  I  am  too  busy." 
You  go  to  another  with  the  same  invitation,  and  he  says, 
"  Wait  till  I  get  my  coat  and  hat,  and  I'll  be  with  you." 
What  is  the  difference  ?  The  first  man  was  a  lawyer,  his 
permanent  choice  reaches  out  to  the  great  ends  of  his  pro- 
fession. He  was  free  in  choosing  not  to  go  with  you,  yet 
the  permanent  choice  which  governs  his  life  had  far  more 
to  do  with  his  answer  than  the  momentary  choice.  The 
other  man  was  a  geologist.  He  was  free  to  stay  at  home, 
but  the  permanent  choice  which  governs  him  was  in  line 
with  your  invitation.  Under  other  circumstances  the  law- 
yer might  have  gone  and  the  geologist  have  staj^ed  at 
home,  but  it  is  easy  to  see  that  the  choices  of  the  moment 
were  subordinate  to  their  ultimate  and  permanent  choices. 
To  the  region  of  ultimate  choices  belongs  character. 
When  a  man  makes  an  ultimate  choice,  he  makes  a  char- 
acter. That  is  to  say,  he  introduces  an  element  of  fixed- 
ness into   his  life.     Freedom  is  the  very  opposite  of  li- 


314  PKESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

cense.  The  man  who  has  no  ultimate  choices  which  abide 
permanentlj  with  him  is  not  free.  It  is  tiie  caprice  of  the 
child  which  manifests  itself  in  a  mere  snarl  of  contradic- 
tory choices  and  acts.  We  are  able  to  live  in  society  be- 
cause men  have  such  permanent  and  abiding  choices,  and 
we  can  count  with  a  fair  degree  of  certainty  upon  tlieir 
acts.  Character  in  the  highest  sense  comes  when  a  man 
has  made  the  supreme  choice  of  the  kingdom  of  God, 
when  his  freedom  is  permanently  enlisted  in  the  service  of 
the  Father  and  His  Son  Jesus  Christ.  You  can  count 
upon  such  a  man.  You  know  that  when  temptations  come 
to  him  he  is  certain  not  to  yield  to  them,  not  because  he 
is  not  free  to  do  so,  but  because  his  pei'manent  choice,  in 
which  his  freedom  is  chiefly  embarked,  will  dominate  his 
subordinate  choice.  It  would  be  wrong  to  say  that  the 
Christian  who  is  approached  with  a  temptation  to  dis- 
honesty is  not  free  when  he  resists  it,  but  you  must  look 
for  his  freedom  chiefly  in  the  great  permanent  choice 
which  dominates  his  life,  not  in  the  momentary  subordi- 
nate choice. 

But  while  character  begins  in  our  permanent  choices,  it 
runs  out  into  our  habits.  These  belong  to  the  sphere  of 
volition  and  outward  act.  Bodily  actions  when  repeated 
form  a  bodily  habit,  that  is,  the  body  tends  to  act  in  the 
line  thus  marked  out.  So  volitions  repeated  form  a  voli- 
tionary  habit.  Now  the  repetition  of  volitions  involved  in 
the  continued  exercise  of  a  permanent  choice  and  the  cor- 
responding subordinate  clioices  forms  a  habit  which  reacts 
upon  the  choice  itself,  both  the  ultimate  choice  and  the  sub- 
ordinate choices,  and  strengthens  them.  We  thus  surround 
ourselves  with  a  bulwark  of  defence.  It  is  also  to  be  noted 
that  the  habits  thus  formed,  and  which  constitute  the  body 
of  character  as  the  permanent  choice  constitutes  its  soul, 
have  a  certain  independence.  Suppose  the  ultimate  choice 
to  be  changed — as  it  always  can  be,  since  it  is  free — then 
the  new  choice  finds  itself  at  cross-purposes  with  the  old 


THE  NATURE   AND   GUILT   OF   SIN  315 

habits.  These  habits  in  such  a  case  may  even  bring  about 
outward  acts  in  direct  opposition  to  tlie  prevailing  choice, 
and  where  they  do  not,  they  form  strong  motives  to  in- 
fluence the  man  in  his  subordinate  choices. 

!N^ow  to  return  from  this  long  philosophical  disquisition 
— all  of  wliich  will  have  its  bearing  upon  our  future  in- 
vestigations in  theology — to  the  subject  with  which  we 
started,  the  sins  of  state  belong  to  the  ultimate  and  su- 
preme choices  of  men,  while  the  sins  of  act  belong  to  the 
subordinate  choices  and  to  the  volitions  and  habits  depen- 
dent upon  them.  It  is  in  character  that  our  sins  of  state 
are  rooted.  Let  a  man's  ultimate  choices  be  wrong  and 
we  have  a  deep-seated  and  abiding  condition  of  wrong. 
Let  his  supreme  choice  be  for  self  instead  of  for  God  and 
His  kingdom,  and  the  man's  whole  state  is  wrong.  The 
Bible  applies  the  term  heart  to  the  inmost  condition  of 
the  will.  An  evil  heart  is  a  permanent  choice  of  self  and 
the  world  rather  than  of  God  and  the  good,  l^ow  the  sins 
of  act,  the  momentary  sins,  are  the  expression  of  the  sin  of 
state.  It  is  because  the  supreme  choice  is  wrong  that  the 
subordinate  choices  are  wrong,  and  that  the  volitions  and 
habits,  are  wrong.  "Out  of  the  heart  come  forth  evil 
thoughts,  murders,  adulteries,  foi'nications,  thefts,  false 
witness,  railings "  (Matt.  xv.  19).  A  man  is  free  and 
therefore  responsible  M^hen  he  commits  an  outward  act  of 
sin,  but  we  must  look  for  the  full  explanation  of  his  sin 
not  merely  to  the  modicum  of  freedom  exercised  in  the 
choice  of  the  moment,  but  to  the  sinful  permanent  choice 
which  governs  the  man's  life.  That  is  the  root  of  all  sin. 
Yet  it  is  to  be  noted — lest  our  theory  should  be  stated  so 
sweepingly  as  to  prove  untrue  to  facts — that  a  man's  su- 
preme choice  may  be  changed,  by  God's  grace  become  a 
choice  of  the  kingdom,  and  yet  sins  of  act  occur.  In  this 
case,  we  must  look  rather  to  the  deep-seated  habit  which 
biases  the  man  in  his  subordinate  choices  for  the  explana- 
tion of  the  actual  sins  than  to  the  main  choice   which 


316  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

is  now  good.  It  is  only  slowly  that  old  habits  of  soul 
and  body  are  worked  out  and  supplanted  by  the  new 
habit  which  a  different  choice  produces.  Nevertheless,  in 
time,  what  Dr.  Chalmers  calls  "  the  expulsive  power  of  a 
new  affection,"  that  is,  of  a  new  choice,  will  prevail. 

IV.  We  have  still  to  look  at  the  guilt  of  sin  and  certain 
correlative  ideas  or  facts  closely  connected  with  the  con- 
ception of  guilt. 

By  guilt  in  the  deepest  sense  of  the  term  we  mean  the 
responsible  authorship  of  sin.  "Guilty  or  not  guilty?" 
is  the  question  with  which  the  prisoner  is  addressed  at  the 
bar  of  justice  ;  "  Didst  thou  do  that  of  which  thou  art  ac- 
cused, and  do  it  responsibly,  or  didst  thou  not  ?  "  Guilt 
is  a  personal  matter.  It  implies  that  the  causality  of  sin 
is  in  the  guilty  person.  It  is  sin  imputed  to  him  because 
it  is  his.  It  also  implies  that  the  guilty  person  was  free 
and  therefore  responsible.  It  carries  with  it  the  idea  of 
ill-desert  or  un worthiness.  There  is  also  another  element 
in  guilt,  namely,  exposure  to  the  just  displeasure  of  the  one 
who  has  been  wronged  by  the  sin,  and  therefore  primarily 
exposure  to  the  just  displeasure  of  God.  But  this  second 
element  is  dependent  upon  the  first.  The  sinner  is  guilty 
in  the  sense  of  being  exposed  to  the  divine  displeasure  be- 
cause he  is  guilty  in  the  sense  of  being  the  responsible 
author  of  the  sin.  In  no  strict  sense  of  the  word  guilt  can 
we  call  a  man  guilty  for  a  sin  not  his  own  ;  if  we  some- 
times use  such  language,  it  is  in  a  qualified  and  semi-figu- 
rative sense. 

There  are  degrees  of  guilt  in  sin.  This  is  a  fact  recog- 
nized by  all  theologians.  As  the  Assembly's  Catechism 
says,  "  Some  sins  in  themselves,  and  by  reason  of  several 
aggravations,  are  more  heinous  in  the  sight  of  God  than 
others."  The  Old  Testament  distinguishes  between 
"  sins  of  infirmity,"  for  which  atonement  was  provided, 
and  "presumptuous  sins,"  which  admitted  of  no  atone- 
ment   (Lev.    V.  10 ;  Numb.   xv.    30  ;  Ps.    xix.    12,  13). 


TIIP]   NATURE   AND   GUILT   OF   SIN  317 

Our  Saviour  also  distinguished  between  different  degrees 
of  guilt  (Matt.  X.  15 ;  xi.  22  seq.  ;  Luke  xii.  48 ;  John 
XV.  22,  24  ;  xix.  11).  There  is  one  sin  of  which  the  guilt 
is  supreme  ;  it  is  the  rejection  of  God's  redeeming  grace. 
For  it  no  atonement  is  possible,  because  it  involves  a  re- 
jection of  atonement  (Heb.  vi.  4-6 ;  x.  26,  27 ;  1  John 
V.  16  ;  2  Pet.  ii.  20  seq.).  I  will  not  enter  into  the  question 
as  to  whether  this  sin  of  definitive  i-ejection  of  God's  grace 
is  identical  with  the  so-called  "sin  against  the  Holy 
Ghost"  (Matt.  xii.  31,  32;  Mark  iii.  28-30;  Luke  xii. 
10).  At  any  rate  they  are  alike  in  this,  that  both  involve 
a  turning  away  from  the  divine  love  and  mercy  and  so 
leave  nothing  more  for  God  to  do.  From  this  highest 
degree  of  guilt  downward,  there  is  a  scale  of  decreasing 
degrees  of  guilt.  In  every  case  the  degree  of  guilt  de- 
pends upon  the  amount  of  knowledge,  and  the  amount  of 
freedom  or  ability  to  exercise  freedom  in  choice.  But  all 
sins  involve  some  guilt,  and  even  the  least  sin  exposes 
us  to  the  just  displeasure  of  a  just  and  loving  God,  our 
Father  and  our  Friend,  as  well  as  our  Judge. 

We  liave  thus  suggested  to  us  the  relation  of  punish- 
ment to  sin.  Guilt  and  punishment  are  correlatives. 
The  middle  term  which  connects  them  is  the  divine  dis- 
pleasure, the  exposure  to  which  is  an  element  in  guilt,  and 
which  is  itself  the  root  and  deepest  element  of  punish- 
ment. It  is  the  reaction  of  God's  holy  nature  against  sin. 
The  sinner  wrongs  God,  he  brings  disorder  into  the  sphere 
of  His  moral  government,  he  separates  himself  from  God, 
he  treats  his  loving  Father  with  ingratitude  and  sets  His 
will  at  naught.  The  sinner  is  able  to  do  this  because 
he  is  free,  and  God  respects  the  freedom  He  has  made. 
But  God  does  not  view  sin  with  indiiference.  Its  guilt 
consists  in  the  fact  that  it  is  sin  against  Him,  and  He 
shows  His  sense  of  its  guilt  by  His  displeasure.  This  is 
that  "  wrath  of  God,"  of  which  the  Bible  speaks  so  often, 
and  which  Paul  says,  "  is  revealed  from  heaven  against 


318  PRESENT   DAY    THEOLOGY 

all  ungodliness  and  nnrigliteousness  of  men  "  (Rom.  i.  18). 
God's  displeasure,  when  it  is  realized  in  its  true  meaning, 
is  itself  the  direst  punishment.  Our  true  life  is  in  God. 
Our  blessedness  is  in  communion  with  Him.  But  let  us  be 
separated  from  Ilim,  let  conscience  witness  to  the  divine 
displeasure  and  show  us  the  clouded  face  of  our  Father, 
and  no  punishment  could  be  greater.  There  is  no  expres- 
sion in  the  Bible  which  more  vividly  describes  the  extreme 
of  punishment  than  those  dreadful  words,  '•  the  wi-atli  of 
the  Lamb."  But  the  divine  displeasure  is  only  the  root 
of  punishment.  It  displays  itself  in  outward  acts.  Here 
we  have  first  those  natural  consequences  which  God  has 
attached  to  sin,  and  which  are  none  the  less  a  divine  pun- 
ishment because  they  have  that  uniformity  which  belongs 
to  the  ordinary  operations  of  nature.  Death  is  the  most 
notable  and  certain  of  these  consequences,  and  suffering 
of  body  and  mind  is  the  most  common  form  in  which 
they  are  manifested.  Then  there  are  the  more  special 
divine  inflictions  or  judgments  which  are  visited  upon  sin 
through  God's  punitive  providence. 

In  the  background  of  punishment,  at  once  natural  con- 
sequence and  divine  infliction,  is  the  suffering  of  the 
other  world,  in  which  the  soul  is  separated  from  God  and 
the  society  of  the  good,  and  left  to  its  own  dark  thoughts 
and  deeds.  Punishment  is  commensurate  with  guilt.  It 
is  retributive,  and  for  every  sin  there  is  a  corresponding 
recompense  of  retribution.  It  has  been  said  that  every 
sin  deserves  eternal  punishment ;  but  such  an  assertion 
seems  to  me  untrue,  as  it  is  certainly  unscriptural,  for  it 
reduces  all  sins  to  a  common  level,  and  makes  no  dif- 
ference between  the  momentary  selfishness  of  a  child  and 
the  black  treason  of  a  Judas.  But  every  sin  has  a  pun- 
ishment proportioned  to  its  guilt.  The  object  of  punish- 
ment is,  primarily,  the  salvation  of  the  sinner.  The  divine 
love  finds  expression  in  the  divine  displeasure  and  mani- 
fests itself  in  outward  punishment,  that  it  may  bring  back 


THE   NATURE   AND   GUILT   OF   SIN  319 

the  wayward  child  to  liis  home  and  his  Father's  heart. 
Punishment  in  its  first  intent  is  a  blessing  in  disguise. 
But  there  is  a  limit  to  the  divine  forbearance,  and  when 
punishment  fails  to  fulfil  its  primary  purpose,  when  the 
sinner  obstinately  refuses  to  return  to  God,  punishment 
enters  upon  another  phase  and  exercises  another  function  : 
it  becomes  God's  means  of  nullifying  the  evil  effects  of  sin 
and  putting  the  sinner  in  a  position  where  he  can  do  no 
more  mischief.  In  saying  this,  I  do  not  mean  to  imply  that 
this  final  punishment  is  not  retributive.  All  punishment 
is  retributive,  but  this  is  also  coercive  and  repressive. 

But  the  mention  of  the  primary  office  of  punishment, 
as  intended  to  bring  the  soul  back  to  God,  suggests  another 
fact  or  moral  principle  closely  related  to  guilt  and  punish- 
ment. I  refer  to  atonement.  The  sinner  is  separated 
from  God  by  his  guilt  and  under  punishment.  How  shall 
he  be  brought  back  ?  What  is  needed  is  reconciliation.  It 
takes  two  to  make  a  quarrel,  and  it  also  takes  two  to  make 
up  the  quarrel.  Now  between  man  and  God,  as  between 
man  and  man,  there  can  be  no  reconciliation  without  atone- 
ment. Some  amends  must  be  made  for  the  wrong  done, 
some  reparation  rendered,  some  satisfaction  given.  This 
opens  the  way  for  reconciliation  and  affords  a  just  ground 
for  it.  Atonement  is  not  the  same  as  punishment,  though 
the  two  are  very  closely  related.  Punishment  is  inflicted 
by  the  one  wronged,  atonement  is  rendered  by  the  wrong- 
doer. The  sinner  bears  his  punishment,  he  renders  atone- 
ment. Atonement  is  in  its  deepest  essence  a  matter  of  the 
sinner's  will,  as  punishment  is  in  its  deepest  essence  a  mat- 
ter of  the  divine  wilk  Atonement  may  express  itself  in 
some  outward  act  or  gift  or  offering,  but  the  real  atone- 
ment is  a  spiritual  offering,  a  sacrifice  of  the  heart.  Pun- 
ishment and  atonement  come  close  together  when,  as  is 
sometimes  the  case,  the  atonement  consists  in  the  patient 
bearing  of  the  punishment  with  full  acknowledgment  of 
its  justice.     When  atonement  does  its  work,  that  is,  when 


320  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

it  is  accepted,  the  result  is  reconciliation,  displeasure  is 
turned  into  favor.  Tlie  outward  effects  of  punishment  may 
still  continue,  but  when  tlie  displeasure  is  gone,  the  root  of 
the  punishment  has  been  cut  off  and  it  ceases  in  any  real 
sense  to  be  punishment.  In  such  a  case  "  there  is  no  more 
condemnation,"  but  peace  and  blessedness.  I  have  spoken 
of  this  subject  of  atonement  at  this  stage  of  our  inquiries 
only  that  I  may  show  the  sinner's  attitude  toward  God 
and  his  need  of  atonement  if  he  is  to  be  reconciled  to 
God.  We  shall  consider  hereafter  his  inability  to  render 
God  any  adequate  atonement,  and  still  later  we  shall  in- 
vestigate that  central  and  wonderful  truth  of  the  Gospel, 
the  doctrine  of  Christ's  vicarious  atonement,  God's  way  of 
salvation  for  the  sinner. 

Such  is  sin — the  anomaly  of  the  universe,  the  blot  upon 
the  creation  which  God  made  very  good,  the  disgrace  of 
mankind.  The  more  we  study  God's  Word,  and  the  fur- 
ther we  advance  in  Christian  experience,  the  profounder 
will  become  our  sense  of  the  exceeding  sinfulness  of  sin. 
When  men  begin  to  make  light  of  it,  to  call  it  by  mild 
names,  to  regard  it  as  infirmity  and  to  ignore  its  guilt, 
they  have  entered  upon  a  path  that  leads  away  from  the 
Gospel.  Christianity  measures  the  guilt  and  the  baleful 
importance  of  sin  by  the  fact  that  God  Himself  became 
incarnate  and  in  the  person  of  Jesus  Christ  died  upon  the 
cross  for  our  redemption  from  it.  When  we  pray,  "  Thy 
kingdom  come,"  we  pray  that  sin  may  cease,  that  sin- 
ners may  become  reconciled  to  God,  that  Satan  may  be 
trampled  under  feet.  What  we  need  as  Christians  is  to 
see  sin  as  it  is,  in  all  its  awful  evil,  that  so  we  may  know 
what  Christ  is  and  join  him  in  his  fight  against  it.  If  the 
Christian's  work  in  the  world  may  be  expressed  in  its  pos- 
itive aspect  as  the  service  of  God  in  His  kingdom,  it  may 
be  expressed  negatively,  with  equal  truth,  as  a  warfare 
with  Christ  and  all  good  beings  as  our  fellow-soldiers, 
against  sin. 


XYIII. 

SIN  AND  MAN'S  RACE  RELATIONS 

If  you  wish  to  know  whether  a  man  is  a  theologian, 
turn  to  his  Greek  Testament,  and  if  it  opens  of  its  own 
accord  to  the  fifth  chapter  of  Romans,  and  jou  find  the 
page  worn  and  brown,  you  may  safely  set  him  down  as  a 
devotee  of  the  sacred  science.  Upon  the  twelfth  verse 
libraries  have  been  written.  It  belongs  to  a  passage 
which,  more  than  any  other  in  the  Bible,  has  been  the 
occasion  of  theological  controversy.  The  interpretation 
of  its  last  word  has  furnished  the  point  of  divergence  to 
the  great  schools  of  divinity.  Let  us  not,  however,  sup- 
pose that  the  controversies  which  have  been  waged  about 
this  verse  are  to  be  measured  in  importance  by  the  place 
they  occupy  in  histories  of  Christian  doctrine.  On  the 
contrary,  while  they  have  brought  much  truth  to  light, 
and  have  done  much  to  preserve  precious  Gospel  teach- 
ings, they  have  also  done  much  to  discredit  theology.  In 
the  silence  of  the  Bible  theologians  often  run  riot.  It  has 
been  so  here.  A  simple  fact  of  vast  importance  is  taught 
in  this  verse,  and  has  been  left  without  explanation.  The 
fact  we  need  to  hold  fast,  but  we  should  respect  the 
reticence  of  revelation,  and  if  we  speculate  and  theorize, 
we  should  hold  our  theories  lightly,  and  with  tolerance  for 
the  theories  of  others,  ready  to  confess  that  we  know  in 
part  and  prophesy  in  part. 

We  have  considered  the  nature  of  sin  as  it  appears  in 
the  individual.     I!^ow  we  have  to  look  at  it  in  the  race 
and  to  examine  its  effects  upon  the  individual  in  his  con- 
nection with  the  race. 
21 


322  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

I.  The  wliole  race  is  infected  with  sin — all  men  are  sin- 
ners. To  prove  this  from  the  Bible  I  do  not  need  to 
cite  particular  texts  of  Scripture,  like  Solomon's  words, 
"  There  is  no  man  that  sinneth  not "  (1  Kings  viii.  46),  or 
James's,  "  In  many  things  M'e  all  stumble  "  (iii.  2),  or  to 
refer  to  those  wonderful  first  three  chapters  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Romans  in  which  Paul  shows  by  incontestable  facts 
that  Jews  and  Gentiles  alike  "  have  sinned  and  come  short 
of  the  glory  of  God  "  (Rom.  iii.  23).  For  the  universality 
of  sin  is  one  of  the  postulates  of  the  Gospel  system.  It  is 
implied  in  the  scriptural  teaching  respecting  the  universal 
need  of  salvation,  in  the  Old  Testament  law,  in  the  insti- 
tution of  sacrifice,  in  the  Jewish  rite  of  circumcision,  in 
the  doctrine  of  atonement  by  Christ,  in  the  call  to  repent- 
ance, in  the  universal  offer  of  the  Gospel,  in  the  ordi- 
nance of  baptism.  One  man,  and  one  only,  Jesus  the 
Christ,  has  lived  without  sin.  His  holiness  is  the  pure 
white  light  in  which  every  life  appears  dark  and  spotted. 
There  are  those  whom  the  Bible  does  indeed  call  righteous, 
but  a  closer  examination  of  the  facts  shows  that,  as  Calvin 
says  (Com.  on  Psalm  v.  12),  they  "are  not  so  called  on  ac- 
count of  the  merit  of  their  works,  but  because  they  aspire 
after  righteousness."  When  sometimes  in  a  moment  of 
self-confidence  a  Christian  is  tempted  to  think  that  he  has 
passed  beyond  the  power  of  sin,  his  presumptuous  thought 
is  checked  by  the  stern  words  of  John,  "  If  we  say  that 
we  have  no  sin  we  deceive  ourselves,  and  the  truth  is  not 
in  us "  (1  John  i.  8).  All  normal  Christian  experience 
confirms  the  scriptural  doctrine  upon  this  point.  The 
nearer  a  man  gets  to  Christ,  the  more  he  feels  the  power 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  more  profound  becomes  his  reali- 
zation of  his  own  sin,  and  the  more  surely  does  he  recog- 
nize the  same  evil  in  all  his  fellow-men.  Nor  need  we 
appeal  merely  to  the  experience  of  the  Christian ;  the 
common  consciousness  of  mankind  affirms  the  universality 
of  sin.     Heathenism,  with  all  the  imperfection  of  its  con- 


SIN   AND   man's   KACE   KELATIONS  323 

ception  of  sin,  is  farthest  from  attempting  to  deny  that 
all  men  are  sinners.  Modern  literature  is  full  of  confes- 
sions of  this  sad  yet  incontestable  fact.  Listen  to  Lord 
Byron  as,  in  language  quite  as  strong  as  that  of  the  Bible, 
he  teaches  this  doctrine  : 

' '  How  beautiful  is  all  this  visible  world  ! 
How  glorious  in  its  action  and  itself  ! 
But  we,  who  name  ourselves  its  sovereigns,  we, 
Half  dust,  half  deity,  alike  unfit 
To  sink  or  soar,  with  our  mixed  essence  make 
A  conflict  of  its  elements,  and  breathe 
The  breath  of  degradation  and  of  pride, 
Contending  with  low  wants  and  lofty  will 
Till  our  mortality  predominates. 
And  men  are — what  they  name  not  to  themselves. 
And  tmst  not  to  each  other."  * 

The  fact  stands  undeniable.  All  men,  heathen  and 
Christian,  converted  and  unconverted,  children  and  adults, 
are  sinners. 

II.  How  now  shall  this  fact  be  explained  ?  If  men  are 
free,  how  comes  it  that  they  all  abuse  their  freedom  and 
become  sinners  ?  Freedom  explains  why  some  are  sin- 
ners, but  not  why  all  are  sinners.  Must  we  not  look 
further  than  men's  freedom  if  we  are  to  account  for  the 
universality  of  sin  ? 

Revelation  answers  the  question  by  its  doctrine  of  the 
Fall.  "By  one  man  sin  entered  into  the  world."  Men 
are  not  mere  individuals,  but  members  of  a  race.  To 
understand  the  universality  of  sin  we  must  go  back  to 
the  beginnings  of  mankind. 

It  will  not  be  possible  at  this  time  to  enter  into  all  the 
details  of  the  wonderful  history  which  is  nai-rated  in  the 
second  and  third  chapters  of  Genesis.     We  shall  be  able 

*  Manfred,  Act  i.,  Scene  2.  See  Mozley's  Lectures  and  other  Theo- 
logical Papers  ;  Original  Sin  asserted  by  Worldly  Philosophers  and 
Poets. 


324  PRESENT   DAY    THEOLOGY 

to  look  oiilj'  at  its  salient  points.  Like  the  account  of 
creation,  the  narrative  of  the  Fall  has  its  conntei-part  in 
the  traditions  which  come  to  ns  through  the  ethnic  relig- 
ions. But  the  story  in  Genesis  is  distinguished  from  these 
venerable  heathen  legends  bj  the  absence  of  all  non- 
theistic  and  unworthy  elements.  Its  profound  truth  does 
not  need  to  be  proved  ;  it  shines  in  its  own  light.  I  see  no 
reason  to  doubt  its  historical  reality.  To  those  Christian 
theologians  who  hold  that  it  is  "  true  but  not  actual," 
it  may  be  conceded  that  the  truth  is  presented  in  part  in 
the  form  of  symbols — the  trees  of  the  knowledge  of  good 
and  evil,  and  of  life,  were  no  ordinai-y  trees — but  there  is 
every  ground  for  accepting  the  personages  described  as 
real,  and  the  events  as  having  actually  taken  place. 

We  have  seen  that  God  created  man  good.  He  came 
from  the  divine  hand  a  perfect  being.  The  divine  image 
shone  forth  from  him  in  its  untarnished  brightness.  All 
his  faculties  and  powers  were  complete  and  in  perfect 
working-order.  Intellectually  he  was  full}'  equipped  for 
his  life-work,  not  indeed  the  paragon  of  knowledge  the 
old  theologians  represented  liim,  but  in  all  the  vigor  of  his 
new  and  untried  powers,  a  man  in  capacity  though  still  a 
child  in  acquisition.  Morallj'  also  he  was  perfect,  though 
this  likewise  was  the  perfection  of  the  starting-point,  not 
of  the  goal.  He  was  moi-e  than  innocent  and  less  than 
holy.  Made  good,  he  was  also  made  for  the  good.  The 
diiferent  elements  of  his  nature  wei'e  perfectly  balanced 
and  worked  together  in  undisturbed  harmony,  the  lower  in 
subordination  to  the  higher.  The  bias  of  his  natui'e  was 
toward  good.  He  stood  in  communion  with  God,  whose 
love  was  upon  him  and  whose  Spirit  dwelt  in  him,  and  to 
whom  his  natural  affection  turned  in  glad  response.  He 
was  in  the  kingdom  of  God,  so  far  as  one  can  be  in  it  by 
nature.  He  was  in  it  by  birthright  and  possession,  in  a 
higher  sense  than  this  can  be  said  of  the  little  children  of 
later  times,  concerning  whom  our  Saviour  declared  that 


SIN  AND  31AN'S  kace  kelations  325 

"  Of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  Above  all,  he  had 
free-will  and  the  power  to  attain  the  chief  end  of  his 
being  without  slip  or  fall.  He  might  have  been  what 
Jesus  Christ  was,  perfect  in  all  his  moral  development. 

In  order  to  give  our  first  parents  the  opportunity  to 
attain  moral  and  spiritual  maturity,  God  subjected  them 
to  a  process  of  education.  He  made  external  nature  a 
means  of  training  them  in  practical  knowledge  and  wis- 
dom, and  revealed  Himself  to  them  that  they  might  learn 
their  true  destination.  But  it  was  not  mere  education. 
We  might  conceive  of  these  first  children  of  God  be- 
ing subjected  only  to  such  influences  as  would  help  them 
forward  to  their  goal.  But  God  chose  another  meth- 
od, namely,  education  by  probation.  By  probation  1  un- 
derstand not  merely  trial,  but  trial  under  mixed  influ- 
ences, evil  as  well  as  good.  God  knew  the  end  from 
the  beginning  when  He  permitted  the  Serpent  to  enter 
Paradise.  The  problem  of  the  permission  of  temptation 
is  in  principle  the  same  as  the  problem  of  the  permission 
of  sin,  which  we  have  already  considered.  God  meant  to 
overrule  the  evil  for  a  higher  good.  He  knew  by  His 
eternal  omniscience  that  man  would  sin,  and  had  taken 
up  the  Fall  into  His  great  plan,  but  He  intended  that 
where  sin  abounded  grace  should  much  more  abound 
(Rom.  V.  20) ;  the  Fall  was  to  open  the  way  of  redemption 
through  Christ. 

When  considering  the  degrees  of  guilt,  we  distinguish 
two  kinds  of  sin,  a  sin  of  weakness  and  a  sin  of  deliberate 
presumption.  The  first  sin  was  of  the  former  kind.  The 
parents  of  the  race  were  beguiled  into  transgression  by 
a  superhuman  Evil  Being.  The  Serpent  offered  Adam 
and  Eve  a  real  good,  but  he  would  have  them  obtain  it  by 
unlawful  means.  '■^  Eritis  siout  Deus!''  Ye  shall  become 
like  God.  To  fully  realize  the  divine  image  is  human 
duty.  "  Be  ye  holy,  for  I  am  holy  "  God  says  to  us.  "  That 
ye  may  be  the  children  of  your  Father  which  is  in  heav- 


326  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

en,"  says  Christ.  But  there  is  a  right  and  a  wrong  way 
of  becoming  like  God.  The  right  way  is  by  obedience 
to  Him,  by  trust  and  dependence  upon  Him.  Our  first 
parents  used  their  freedom  to  choose  the  wrong  way  of 
attaining  the  right  end.  They  sought  to  reach  their  chief 
end  by  going  outside  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  The  fruit 
of  the  tree  was  only  the  occasion  of  the  wrong  choice ; 
both  in  God's  purpose  and  man's  thought  it  was  a  means 
to  an  end  beyond  itself.  Adam  and  Eve  had  not  much 
moral  knowledge,  but  they  had  enough  to  understand  that 
first  law  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  that  God's  will  is  to  be 
done  under  all  circumstances  in  God's  way,  that  obedi- 
ence is  duty  and  disobedience  sin.  In  their  disobedience 
against  the  light  of  a  consciously  recognized  obligation  to 
God  lay  their  guilt,  a  guilt  that  cost  them  Paradise.  Yet, 
after  all,  it  was  a  Fall,  not  a  deliberate  act  of  rebellion 
against  God,  and  it  left  them  still  capable  of  redemption. 
There  was  a  sin  of  a  deeper  dye,  a  sin  that  shuts  out  even 
from  divine  help,  which  our  first  parents  had  not  com- 
mitted. 

The  consequences  of  sin  followed  close  upon  the  heels 
of  the  first  transgression.  By  it  our  first  parents  turned 
aside  from  the  pursuit  of  their  chief  end  and  put  them- 
selves outside  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  The  relation  of 
communion  and  fellowship  in  which  they  had  stood  with 
God  was  broken.  The  divine  displeasure,  which  is  the 
root  and  deepest  element  of  all  punishment,  rested  upon 
them.  They  were  deprived  of  the  special  influences  and 
indwelling  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  only  the  more  exter- 
nal influences  of  the  Spirit  in  conscience  remained.  Con- 
science itself  witnessed  to  God's  displeasure,  raising  its 
voice  in  condemnation  and  filling  them  with  a  shame 
which  led  the  guilty  children  of  God  to  hide  themselves 
from  the  face  of  their  heavenly  Father  and  to  try  to  con- 
ceal their  nakedness  from  each  other.  The  expulsion  from 
Paradise  symbolized  and  turned  into  outward  punishment 


siisr  AND  man's  race  relations  327 

the  separation  from  God  and  His  kingdom.  There  were 
also  inward  consequences.  Tlie  abuse  of  freedom  dis- 
turbed the  machinery  of  man's  spiritual  powers,  hitherto 
so  nicely  adjusted  and  working  in  such  perfect  harmony. 
A  wrong  character  was  formed  by  the  wrong  choice. 
Self-love,  which  is  good  when  subordinated  to  the  love  of 
God,  became  selfishness.  The  natural  bias  toward  God 
and  His  kingdom  became  transformed  into  a  bias  toward 
sin.  The  law  of  habit  began  to  work  to  fix  the  evil  char- 
acter which  had  been  initiated.  A  corrupt  nature  was 
formed,  for  which  our  first  parents  were  responsible,  be- 
cause it  was  the  result  of  their  own  sin,  and  which  became 
an  inward  source  of  temptation  to  new  sin.  Finally,  the 
divine  penalty,  which  had  been  threatened  in  case  of  dis- 
obedience, fell  upon  them  ;  they  became  subject  to  death. 
Undoubtedly  the  death  here  referred  to  is  physical  death, 
the  separation  of  soul  and  body  and  the  accompanying 
dissolution  of  the  body.  Man  was  made  to  be  a  unitj^,  as 
we  know  from  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection.  Sin  has 
destroyed  that  unity.  The  spirit  and  the  body  are  so  ad- 
justed that  the  disorder  of  the  former  brings  about  the 
destruction  of  the  latter.  The  divine  threat  went  into  im- 
mediate execution.  The  first  act  of  transgression  gave 
man,  in  place  of  the  glorious  body  which  God  created,  such 
a  "  mortal  body  "  as  that  of  which  Paul  speaks  (Rom.  vi. 
12 ;  viii.  11).  Death  is  ever  the  great  outward  and  visible 
proof  of  the  divine  punishment  of  sin,  and  thus  it  becomes 
the  symbol  of  the  spiritual  disorder  and  of  the  eternal 
consequences  of  that  disorder.  There  is  a  spiritual  death 
and  there  is  a  punishment  that  is  eternal  death. 

But  we  shall  not  do  justice  to  the  scriptural  teachings 
respecting  the  Fall  if  we  stop  at  this  point.  Our  first 
parents  were  not  left  to  themselves  when  they  had  sinned. 
I  have  before  insisted  that  redemption  was  not  an  after- 
thought. Grace  began  to  work  as  soon  as  man  sinned. 
The  promise  of  redemption  through  the  seed  of  the  wo- 


328  PKESENT   DAY    THEOLOGY 

man  was  given  before  the  culprits  were  expelled  from 
Paradise.  Tliej  found  God  outside  the  garden  as  well  as 
in  it.  Without  removing  the  natural  consequences  of  sin, 
He  granted  Ilis  forgiving  grace  to  His  fallen  children, 
on  the  ground  of  the  redemptive  work  of  Jesus  Christ. 
The  kingdom  of  God  was  opened  to  them  once  more,  upon 
different  conditions  indeed,  but  with  the  blessed  assur- 
ance that  the  effects  of  the  Fall  should  jet  be  ovei-corae. 
This  did  not  make  Adam's  transgression  less  a  sin  or  him- 
self less  a  sinner.  It  put  him  into  a  new  relation  to  God, 
in  which,  though  he  deserved  nothing,  yet  there  was  a 
possibility  that  by  God's  grace  he  might  still  have  all. 

HI.  Such  was  the  first  sin,  and  such  its  effects  upon 
those  who  connnitted  it.  But  we  still  ask.  How  did  this 
first  sin  give  rise  to  the  sins  of  the  countless  millions  of 
mankind  ?  Upon  this  point  the  Bible  gives  us  no  infor- 
mation. The  fact  that  there  is  some  kind  of  causal  con- 
nection between  Adam's  transgression  and  the  sins  of  his 
descendants  is  implied  in  the  third  chapter  of  Genesis,  It 
is  hinted  at  in  the  fifteenth  chapter  of  1st  Corinthians 
(verse  22),  where  we  are  told  that  "  in  Adam  all  die ; " 
for  it  is  the  teaching  of  the  Bible  elsewhere  that  death 
is  the  punishment  of  individual  sin.  The  fullest  treat- 
ment of  the  subject  is  to  be  found  in  the  fifth  chapter  of 
Ivomans,  verses  12-21.  It  is  indeed  only  incidentally 
that  Paul  speaks  of  it.  He  is  enlarging  upon  the  great- 
ness of  the  blessings  which  have  flowed  to  mankind  from 
the  redemptive  work  of  Christ,  and  enforces  the  truth  by 
a  comparison  between  Christ  and  Adam,  in  which  he 
shows  that  the  benefits  which  have  resulted  from  the 
obedience  of  the  former  have  far  exceeded  the  evils 
which  have  resulted  from  the  disobedience  of  the  latter. 
He  has  in  mind  rather  the  universal  consequence  of  death 
which  has  fallen  upon  all  men  as  the  effect  of  Adam's 
transgression  than  the  universal  sin  which  has  come  fi'om 
the  same  source.     Yet  when  in  the  12th  verse  we  are  told 


SIN   AND   man's   race   RELATIONS  329 

that  "  tlirongh  one  man  sin  entered  the  world,  and  death 
through  shi ;  and  so  death  passed  nnto  all  men,  for  that 
all  sinned,"  a  causal  connection  of  some  sort  between  the 
first  sin  and  the  universal  sin  is  certainly  indicated,  and 
this  whether  we  understand  the  words,  "  for  that  all 
sinned,"  to  designate  directly  the  transgressions  of  indi- 
vidual men  or  to  point  in  a  figurative  sense  to  a  participa- 
tion in  Adam's  transgression.  In  the  latter  understanding 
of  the  clause  its  meaning  would  be  analogous  to  that  of  the 
words  referred  to  a  moment  ago,  "  In  Adam  all  die,"  which 
does  not  mean  that  all  men  actually  died  when  Adam  died, 
but  that  inasmuch  as  they  all  died  in  consequence  of  his 
transgression  they  may  be  figuratively  regarded  as  partici- 
pating in  his  death.  This  causal  connection  between  the 
first  transgression  and  the  sins  of  Adam's  posterity  is  im- 
plied throughout  the  whole  passage ;  but  it  comes  to  the 
clearest  statement  in  the  19th  verse,  where  we  are  told 
that  "  through  one  man's  disobedience  the  many,"  that  is, 
as  the  context  shows,  all  mankind,  "  were  made  sinners." 
But  even  here  the  nature  of  the  connection  is  not  stated, 
and  we  look  in  vain  for  any  explanation.  There  are,  it  is 
true,  certain  other  passages  in  the  Bible,  upon  which  theo- 
logians rel}'  to  prove  their  theories  respecting  the  connec- 
tion, but  when  they  are  subjected  to  a  full  and  impartial 
exegesis  they  turn  out  to  be  utterly  valueless  so  far  as  the 
subject  before  us  is  concerned. 

How  shall  we  explain  this  reticence  of  revelation  ?  I  do 
not  know.  Perhaps  it  is  better  for  us  to  respect  it  than 
to  try  to  explain  it.  A  sufficient  reason  may  be  that  the 
silence  of  the  Bible  concerns  the  philosophy  of  sin,  and 
that  it  is  no  object  of  the  Bible  to  teach  philosophy.  The 
important  facts  are  that  men  are  sinners,  and  that  sin  en- 
tered the  world  in  the  beginnings  of  the  race. 

Nevertheless,  we  may  not  leave  the  subject  here.  No 
adequate  theological  knowledge  of  the  doctrine  before 
us  is  possible  without  some  consideration  of  the  various 


330  PEESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

theories  which  have  been  held  respecting  the  relation  of 
the  universal  sin  to  Adam's  transgression.  Moreover,  it 
is  right  that  we,  while  reverently  accepting  the  reticence 
of  the  Bible  and  candidly  confessing  our  ignorance,  should 
give  such  explanation  as  we  can.  It  is  not  wrong  to  spec- 
ulate and  philosophize.  The  wrong  comes  in  when  on 
the  ground  of  our  speculations  and  philosophizings  we 
begin  to  dogmatize. 

lY.  There  is  no  more  interesting  chapter  in  the  history 
of  Christian  doctrine  than  that  which  relates  to  the  sub- 
ject before  us.  The  profoundest  thought  of  some  of  the 
greatest  theologians  and  philosophers  has  been  devoted  to 
the  doctrine  of  sin.  I  can  give  here  only  the  most  meagre 
outline. 

We  begin  with  the  theory  of  Angus  tin.  This  great 
man,  who  had  been  brought  by  God's  grace  out  of  a  life  of 
sin,  and  through  many  intellectual  and  spiritual  errors  into 
the  freedom  and  grace  of  the  Gospel,  was  profoundly  con- 
vinced of  the  impotency  of  the  sinful  human  will,  and  the 
entire  dependence  of  man  upon  God's  grace.  This  led 
him  to  lay  the  strongest  emphasis  upon  the  divine  predes- 
tination. It  led  him,  also,  so  far  as  our  doctrine  is  con- 
cerned, to  seek  the  closest  causal  connection  between  the 
sin  of  Adam  and  the  sinfulness  of  his  descendants.  Start- 
ing from  the  premises  of  the  Platonic  realism,  Augustin 
tauo-ht  that  the  whole  race  was  in  Adam  when  he  sinned. 
It  was  consequently  the  personal  transgression  of  each 
member  of  the  race.  Our  individual  existence  begins 
with  birth,  but  there  is  a  pre-existent  state  in  our  an- 
cestors. Now,  since  we  were  all  in  Adam,  we  all  sinned 
when  he  sinned.  Consequently,  when  we  begin  our  indi- 
vidual existence  we  are  burdened  with  the  guilt  and  the 
consequences  of  Adam's  sin,  and  for  the  best  of  reasons 
— because  it  was  our  own  sin.  We  come  into  the  world 
wuth  a  depraved  nature  inherited  from  Adam,  which  is 
sinful  and  the  source  of  sin.     This  corrupt  nature  is  called 


SllSr   AND   MAN'S   RACE   RELATIONS  331 

"original  sin,"  to  distinguish  it  from  tlie  actual  sins  which 
we  commit  as  individuals.  But  the  sinful  nature  gives 
rise  of  necessity  to  actual  sin.  Our  wills  have  no  power 
to  choose  the  good,  or,  as  Augustin  puts  it,  we  are  free 
only  to  do  evil.  On  account  both  of  the  transgression 
of  Adam  and  our  corrupt  nature  we  are  guilty  and  con- 
demned. We  are  born  into  the  world  under  sentence  of 
eternal  punishment,  and  can  be  delivered  from  it  only  by 
the  unmerited  grace  of  God. 

Precisely  the  opposite  of  this  stern  theory  was  that  of 
Augustin's  great  opponent,  Pelagius.  He  had  been  brought 
up  in  the  Greek  church,  where  much  emphasis  was  laid 
upon  the  freedom  of  the  will.  He  held  that  we  come  into 
the  world  as  free  as  Adam,  and  without  either  guilt  for  his 
trangression  or  a  corrupt  nature  inherited  from  him.  The 
only  connection  between  Adam's  sin  and  that  of  his  pos- 
terity which  Pelagius  would  admit  was  that  arising  from 
the  evil  effects  of  Adam's  example.  Our  first  parents  stood 
at  the  head  of  the  line  and  set  an  example  of  sin,  which 
most  of  their  descendants  have  followed,  though  Pelagius 
claimed  that  not  a  few  men  have  led  perfect  lives. 

The  prevalent  theory  of  the  Middle  Ages  sought  to 
avoid  the  extremes  of  the  doctrines  of  Augustin  and  Pe- 
lagius. The  church  of  Rome  taught  that  Adam  before 
the  Fall  possessed  an  especial  endowment  of  divine  grace 
by  which  his  lower  nature  was  kept  in  subordination  to 
the  higher.  By  the  Fall  he  lost  this  "  superadded  gift  " 
and  his  nature  was  corrupted.  We  are  born  into  the  her- 
itage of  his  sin  and  guilt.  We,  like  him,  are  deprived  of 
the  divine  grace  which  he  had  before  the  Fall,  and  herein 
consists  our  original  sin,  which  renders  us  guilty  before 
God.  We  also  inherit  from  him  a  disordered  nature,  or 
concupiscence,  which,  however,  is  not  in  itself  sinful.  By 
baptism  original  sin  is  washed  away  and  the  divine  grace 
restored,  and  while  concupiscence  remains,  and  is  the 
source  of  temptation  to  sin,  we  have  free-will  to  resist  it. 


332  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

The  Reformers  held  in  substance  the  theory  of  Angus- 
tin,  though  they  made  little  use  of  the  theory  of  realism 
by  which  he  explained  our  connection  with  Adam.  The 
first  important  modification  among  Protestants  of  the  Au- 
gustinian  doctrine  was  the  so-called  Federal  or  Covenant 
Theory,  according  to  which  God  established  with  Adam  a 
"covenant  of  works"  in  behalf  not  only  of  himself  but  all 
his  posterity,  Adam  was  made  the  representative  of  all 
mankind,  and  upon  his  choice  hung  the  moral  and  spiritual 
destiny  of  the  race.  He  fell,  and,  so  far  as  their  relation 
to  God  was  concei-ned,  the  race  fell  with  him.  Conse- 
quently, we  come  into  the  world  resting  under  the  guilt 
of  Adam's  transgression,  which  is  imputed  to  us  because 
he  was  our  federal  representative,  while  we  inherit  from 
him  the  corrupt  nature,  or  original  sin,  which  was  the 
result  of  his  transgression.  The  practical  results  of  this 
theory  are  the  same  as  those  which  flow  from  the  Au- 
gustinian,  the  only  difference  being  that  the  oneness  with 
Adam  is  a  legal  rather  than  a  personal  union.  The 
Federal  theory  binds  us  with  the  same  iron  chain  of  guilt, 
condemnation,  and  helplessness. 

A  more  decided  modification  of  the  Augustinian  posi- 
tion, though  not  differing  in  its  practical  results,  was  the 
theory  of  Mediate  Imputation,  taught  by  French  Protes- 
tant theologians  of  Saumur  about  the  middle  of  the  seven- 
teenth century.  This  theory  represents  men  as  coming 
into  the  world  not  with  the  double  guilt  which  the  Au- 
gustinian and  Federal  doctrines  teach,  but  with  only  the 
guilt  which  arises  from  the  corrupt  nature,  or  original  sin, 
which  we  inherit  from  Adam.  Adam's  sin  is  not  imputed 
directly  to  us,  but  only  indirectly  or  mediately  through 
our  inherited  corruption  of  nature, 

A  more  decided  departure  from  the  older  views  was  in- 
volved in  the  Arminian  views  on  the  subject.  The  theo- 
logians of  this  school  held  to  the  existence  of  original  sin, 
by  which  men  are  exposed  to  God's  wrath  and  rendered 


SIW   AND   man's   race   RELATIONS  333 

incapable  of  doing  His  will  ;  but  tbej  also  taugbt  a  uni- 
versal grace  by  wliicli  the  effects  of  the  Fall  are  nullified 
and  all  men  are  capacitated  to  accept  the  invitations  of  the 
Gospel  and  attain  their  chief  end. 

The  old  doctrine  of  sin  among  our  New  England  fathers 
was  the  Federal  theory,  as  stated  in  the  Westminster  Con- 
fession of  Faith,  The  result,  however,  of  that  remark- 
able movement  w-hich  is  known  by  the  name  of  the  J^ew 
England  Theology,  and  which  began  in  the  teachings  and 
speculations  of  Jonathan  Edwards,  was  to  introduce  some 
important  changes.  The  theologians  of  this  school  denied 
the  imputation  of  Adam's  sin,  either  directly  or  mediately. 
Men,  they  said,  are  guilty  only  for  their  own  sins.  They 
also  denied  that  we  inherit  a  corrupted  nature  or  original 
sin.  The  only  original  sin,  declare  Hopkins  and  Emmons, 
was  the  sin  of  Adam.  Their  maxim  w^as  that  "All  sin 
consists  in  sinning ; "  there  can  be  no  sin  that  is  not  the 
outcome  of  a  man's  own  choice.  Yet  they  did  not  deny 
the  connection  between  Adam's  transgression  and  the  sins 
of  his  posterity ;  on  the  contrary,  these  theologians  made 
much  of  it  in  their  system.  They  found  the  connection 
in  what  they  called  a  "divine  constitution,"  that  is,  an 
arrangement  of  God's  providence  by  which,  as  the  result 
of  Adam's  sin,  each  member  of  the  race  begins  his  moral 
career  with  a  sinful  choice,  his  first  moral  act  being  a  sin- 
ful act.  We  cannot  go  behind  this  divine  constitution  ; 
it  is  so  because  God  has  made  it  so.  These  stalwart  New 
England  theologians  were  strict  determinists  ;  they  held  a 
doctrine  of  "divine  efficiency,"  which  made  God,  to  all 
intents  and  purposes,  the  author  of  all  human  acts,  good 
and  bad  alike.  Their  theory  was  that  God,  on  account  of 
Adam's  sin,  so  orders  things  as  to  make  our  first  choice 
a  sinful  choice.  It  was  reserved  for  Dr.  IST.  W.  Taylor,  of 
New  Haven,  one  of  the  greatest  in  the  long  line  of  New 
England  theologians,  to  rescue  the  doctrine  from  the  ex- 
tremes into  which  it  had  run,  while  at  the  same  time  he 


334  PEESENT   DAY    TilEOLOGY 

retained  all  the  more  important  results  that  had  been  won 
in  the  struggles  with  the  old  Calvinistic  doctrine.  He 
taught  that  as  the  result  of  Adam's  sin  men  came  into 
the  world  witli  a  bias  or  tendency  to  sin,  which  is  not  the 
efficient  cause  but  only  the  occasion  of  their  sins.  Through 
the  operation  of  this  bias  and  the  circumstances  in  which 
they  are  placed,  all  men  sin,  but  they  do  it  freely  and  not 
from  necessity.  Dr.  Taylor  repudiated  the  doctrine  of 
the  divine  efficiency  and  maintained  the  true  freedom  of 
man.  He  left  the  way  open  for  one  further  step,  which 
very  many,  if  not  most,  of  the  later  theologians  of  New 
England  have  taken,  namely,  the  explanation  of  the  bias 
or  tendency  to  sin"  through  inheritance  from  our  ancestors, 
and  ultimately  from  Adam. 

Y.  The  way  is  now  open  for  us  to  attempt  a  theological 
statement  of  our  own  upon  this  most  interesting  subject. 
We  shall  use  the  history  of  speculation  aright,  not  so 
much  by  allowing  ourselves  to  wonder  at  the  vagaries  of 
the  theologians  as  by  seeking  the  elements  of  truth  which 
their  theories  contain,  and  seeking  to  combine  them  into 
one  consistent  whole. 

We  have  to  do  with  the  relations  of  the  individual  to 
the  race.  Let  us,  before  we  attempt  to  solve  the  problem 
of  the  connection  of  Adam's  sin  with  ours,  look  at  this 
matter.  We  are  not  mere  individuals,  we  are  members 
of  a  race.  The  race  is  an  oi'ganism,  that  is,  it  is  a  whole 
composed  of  parts  or  members,  which  are  reciprocally 
means  and  ends,  and  which  work  together  for  the  attain- 
ment of  the  end  which  belongs  to  the  whole.  The  race 
is  not  merely  the  aggregate  of  the  individuals  which  be- 
long to  it.  It  has  an  existence  that  is  over  and  above  the 
existence  of  its  members.  When  we  speak  of  man  we  do 
not  mean  the  same  thing  as  when  we  speak  of  men.  So 
there  are  smaller  unities  in  the  great  unity  of  the  race, 
each  of  which  is  composed  of  many  individuals.  There 
are  nations,  and  when  we  speak  of  them  we  do  not  mean 


SIN   AND   man's   race   RELATIONS  335 

merely  the  sum  total  of  people  who  live  in  a  certain  coun- 
try, but  a  body  that  has  its  own  peculiarities,  a  moral  per- 
son, if  we  may  use  the  term,  which  has  its  own  character- 
istics, its  own  mission,  its  own  destiny.  The  family  is 
another  unity  in  the  larger  unity  with  its  own  peculiar 
life  and  function. 

Now  we  cannot  understand  a  man  if  we  look  at  him  in 
his  mere  individuality.  We  must  view  him  also  in  his 
relation  to  mankind.  Indeed  a  man  could  not  become  a 
man,  if  he  were  left  to  himself.  He  is  like  a  fruit  that 
must  have  a  tree  to  grow  upon.  Cut  him  off  and  he 
leads  an  imperfect  life,  if  he  leads  any  at  all.  There  is  a 
connection  between  men  which  makes  them  dependent 
upon  each  other  for  well-being  and  growth,  which  gives 
them  common  fortunes,  common  joys  and  sufferings,  com- 
mon destinies.  We  are  all  under  the  law  of  solidarity,  as 
it  is  called.  We  are  bound  up  in  a  common  life.  We 
cannot  keep  the  effects  of  our  acts  to  ourselves ;  they  go 
on  vibrating  into  other  lives.  We  are  affected  by  all  the 
influences  about  us.  If,  then,  we  are  to  explain  what  a 
man  is  and  what  he  does,  we  must  distinguish  three 
elements  in  his  life — hereditary  influence,  environment, 
and  freedom. 

Modern  science,  especially  in  connection  with  the  theory 
of  organic  evolution,  has  brought  into  prominence  the  ef- 
fects of  heredity.  An  important  part  of  what  we  are 
comes  to  us  from  our  ancestors.  We  inherit  their  bodily 
peculiarities,  their  mental  aptitudes,  their  dispositions, 
good  and  bad.  Blood  tells.  We  did  not  choose  our 
fathers  and  mothers,  but  much  of  what  we  are  depends 
upon  the  fact  that  they  were  they,  and  not  other  people. 
We  are  chips  of  the  old  block.  The  peculiarities  of  re- 
mote ancestors  come  out  in  us.  Augustin  was  struggling 
with  a  great  truth  when  he  taught  our  oneness  with  Adam. 
We  have  pre-existed  in  our  ancestors,  and  our  lives  are,  in 
a  true  sense,  a  prolongation  of  theirs. 


336  PEESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

Bat  even  more  important  than  our  inheritance  is  the 
environment  into  which  we  enter.  In  the  most  formative 
period  of  life,  when  our  wills  and  our  whole  moral  and 
spiritual  nature  are  plastic,  we  are  brought  under  the  play 
of  the  strongest  moral  influences,  good  and  bad,  whicli 
exist  in  the  world.  There  is  home  in  the  first  place. 
How  much  of  what  is  most  important  in  our  after-life  is 
taken  in  with  our  mothers'  milk  !  What  a  moulding  power 
parents  and  brothers  and  sisters  and  all  the  home  sur- 
roundings have  over  us  !  It  makes  an  enormous  difference 
whether  a  child  is  brought  up  in  a  Christian  home  or  a 
pagan  home.  Then  there  are  the  influences  of  companion- 
ship, of  the  school,  of  the  church,  of  the  business  we  en- 
ter, of  society  generally,  of  literature,  of  politics.  What  a 
steady  and  constant  pressure  of  influences  there  is  upon 
us  from  every  side ! 

In  the  midst  of  these  influences,  hereditary  and  en- 
vironing, freedom  has  its  opportunity  and  its  mission. 
At  first  it  is  almost  powerless  under  the  pressure  from 
within  and  without.  But  gradually  it  finds  its  strength. 
It  is  far  from  being  omnipotent,  but  though  it  cannot  do 
all  things,  it  can  do  much.  It  can  modify  the  inherited 
nature.  Evil  dispositions  which  came  to  us  from  our 
parents  or  parents'  parents  can  be  gradually  overcome. 
Good  dispositions  can  be  fostered.  Mentf},!  aptitudes  can 
be  developed.  Then  the  free-will  reacts  upon  the  envi- 
ronment. We  are  not  only  influenced  but  we  can  exert 
influence.  For  good  or  for  evil  we  can  accept  or  resist 
the  forces  that  act  upon  us.  As  one  after  another  the 
choices  of  life  are  passed  over  from  parents  and  teachers 
and  employers  to  the  child  and  youth,  the  opportunity 
comes  to  use  freedom  in  determining  the  tenor  of  our  ex- 
istence and  establishing  our  future.  Character  is  some- 
thing each  man  forms  for  himself.  He  does  not  inherit 
it  It  does  not  come  to  him  from  his  environment.  It  is 
his  own. 


SIN   AND   man's    EACE    RELATIONS  337 

Now,  as  I  have  already  said,  if  we  will  explain  a  man's 
life  and  work,  we  must  look  at  these  three  things  — 
hereditaiT  influence,  environment,  and  freedom.  Let  us 
look  at  the  three  in  connection  with  the  subject  of  sin. 
In  the  first  place,  sin  has  aifected  us  in  our  inherited  nat- 
ure. When  Adam  sinned  he  brought  disorder  into  his 
moral  and  ph^-sical  nature.  This  disorder,  which  was  a 
source  of  temptation  to  further  sin,  and  as  the  result  of 
repeated  sins  became  a  fixed  habit,  a  corrupt  nature,  was 
transmitted  by  Adam  to  his  descendants,  who  in  turn 
passed  it  on  to  theirs,  with  such  increments  of  evil  habit 
as  their  own  sin  produced.  It  is  true  that  Adam  and  his 
descendants,  being  under  the  divine  grace,  made  good 
choices  and  formed  right  habits,  which  they  also  trans- 
mitted to  their  posterity  ;  but  these  influences  were  not 
sufficient  to  counteract  the  evil  influences.  So  it  hap- 
pens that  we  all,  proximately,  as  the  result  of  the  sins  of 
our  immediate  ancestors,  and  ultimately,  as  the  result  of 
Adam's  sin,  come  into  the  world  with  a  disordered  or  cor- 
rupt nature.  This  nature  is  not  itself  sin,  nor  is  it  sinful 
in  any  strict  sense  of  the  word.  We  may  call  it,  if  we 
please,  in  deference  to  accepted  theological  usage,  original 
sin  ;  but  we  use  the  word  sin  in  this  case  in  a  very  dif- 
ferent sense  from  what  we  do  when  we  are  speaking  of 
our  own  evil  choices  and  their  consequences.  We  are  not 
responsible  for  our  corrupt  nature,  nor  does  it  entail  guilt 
upon  us.  God  views  things  as  they  are,  and  he  does  not 
hold  us  guilt}'  unless  we  are  truly  guilt}'-.  ISTevertheless, 
this  inherited  nature  is  a  source  of  strong  temptation  to 
sin.  It  acts  upon  our  wills  with  a  mighty  pressure.  It  is 
a  traitor  within  the  camp,  that  often  leads  us  to  an  igno- 
minious surrender  of  our  freedom.  We  may  even  so  far 
yield  to  it  as  to  identify  ourselves  with  it  and  become  re- 
sponsible for  it.  But  we  may,  if  we  will,  resist  it,  and  at 
last,  in  the  other  life,  if  not  in  this,  wholly  overcome  it. 
Just  as  we  overcome  our  self-formed  evil  habits  by  a  new 
83 


338  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

choice  which  gradually  forms  new  habits,  so  this  inherited 
habit  may  be  by  God's  grace  gradually  overcome. 

Then,  sin  is  everywhere  in  our  environment.  Looking 
first  at  the  inmost  environment,  the  Holy  Spirit  does  not 
dwell  in  us  at  the  first  to  exercise  those  special  influences 
which  Adam  possessed.  We  have  indeed  the  indwelling 
of  the  Spirit,  in  and  through  conscience,  by  which  we 
know  our  duty  to  God  and  our  fellow-men,  and  especially 
in  Christian  countries  the  gracious  workings  of  the  Spirit 
attending  God's  revelation  of  grace  are  brought  to  bear 
upon  the  soul.  But  in  conscience  and  grace  the  Holy 
Spirit  comes  to  us,  so  to  speak,  from  without,  and  only 
enters  the  inmost  life  as  we  open  our  hearts  by  a  free  and 
conscious  act  to  receive  Ilim.  Moreover,  we  enter  into  a 
world  where  sin  abounds.  Our  parents  are  sinful,  our 
friends  are  sinful,  sin  is  rooted  in  all  the  institutions  of 
society.  Satan  is  active  everywhere.  The  world  is  a 
wicked  world.  Even  nature  is  affected  and  is  a  source  of 
temptation  to  sin.  The  divine  grace,  it  is  true,  is,  as  has 
just  been  said,  also  working  in  the  world,  but  the  kingdom 
of  God  has  not  yet  so  far  advanced  as  to  have  overcome 
the  evil.  From  our  earliest  infancy,  along  with  influences 
of  good  which  tend  to  make  us  holy,  the  temptations  to 
sin  come  in  upon  us  from  every  side.  If  our  inhei'ited 
nature  is  a  traitor  wnthin  the  camp,  the  full  attack  of  the 
enemy  comes  to  us  from  Mdthout.  We  are  not  responsi- 
ble for  this  sinful  environment.  So  far  as  it  affects  us 
necessarily  and  without  our  consent,  it  entails  no  guilt 
upon  us.  Doubtless  there  are  many  things  in  every  life 
which  to  men  appear  sinful,  but  which  the  Searcher  of 
Hearts  knows  to  be  merely  natural  eifects  of  our  surround- 
ings, over  which  we  could  have  no  control.  The  rampant 
wickedness  in  which  the  people  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah 
found  themselves  placed  will  not  be  counted  against  them 
in  the  day  of  judgment,  so  far  as  they  did  not  consent  to 
it  by  their  own  free  choice  (Matt.  x.  15  ;  xi.  24).     JS'ever- 


SIN   AND   man's    race   RELATIONS  339 

tlieless,  we  have  a  power  of  resistance  which  enables  us 
to  brace  ourselves  against,  and  by  God's  grace  finally  to 
overcome,  the  evil  influences  of  our  surroundings.  Our 
responsibility  depends  upon  our  attitude  toward  the  sin 
about  us,  our  acceptance  or  resistance  of  it,  according  to 
the  knowledge  and  ability  which  we  possess. 

It  is  under  the  pressure  of  these  influences  that  our 
freedom  is  developed.  God  has  placed  us  in  a  state  of 
probation  and  gives  us  our  spiritual  education  in  a  school 
of  mingled  good  and  evil.  As  a  matter  of  fact  we  all  sin. 
To  a  greater  or  less  extent  we  consent  by  our  free  choice 
to  the  temptations  which  come  to  us  from  our  disordered 
nature  and  our  sinful  surroundings.  This  is  sin.  It 
begins  with  the  first  moral  activity  of  the  child.  If  not 
counteracted  by  the  divine  grace,  it  becomes  at  last  that 
confirmed  choice  of  self  and  rejection  of  God  which  ship- 
wn-ecks  the  whole  man.  When  we  reach  the  period  of  full 
moral  responsibility,  and  find  ourselves  confronting  the 
great  question  of  life,  the  kingdom  of  God  or  the  service 
of  self,  we  discover  that  we  have  already,  by  many  acts  of 
choice,  for  which  we  have  been  responsible  just  in  propor- 
tion to  our  knowledge  and  freedom,  to  a  great  extent  de- 
cided the  question  against  God.  We  are  sinners.  All 
that  can  be  said  is  that  we  have  not  sinned  away  our 
day  of  grace.  That  we  cannot  do  until  with  full  knowl- 
edge and  purpose  we  reject  God's  proffered  grace. 

Now  in  lai'ge  part  we  can  explain  the  universality  of 
sin  through  heredity  and  environment :  but  not  alto- 
gether. The  essential  element  in  sin  is  fi-eedom.  That 
must  be  held  fast  at  all  hazards.  If  we  let  that  go,  sin 
ceases  to  be  sin,  and  responsibility  and  guilt  vanish  with 
it.  There  is  therefore  an  inscrutable  factor  in  our  prob- 
lem, and  we  may  as  well  confess  it.  Free  choice  is  always 
inscrutable.  It  is  an  ultimate  fact.  We  may  explain 
why  a  man  did  so  and  so  in  part  by  the  motives  which 
influenced  him,  but  only  in  part ;  as  regards  the  accept- 


340  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

ance  of  the  motives  we  can  only  say  that  he  did  so,  he 
chose  so,  and  that  is  the  end  of  it.  It  is  the  same  with 
this  universal  choice.  We  explain  it  in  part  hy  the  cor- 
rupt nature  and  the  environment,  we  can  see  that  there  is 
also  a  partial  explanation  in  the  fact  that  rationality  and 
freedom  have  their  beginnings  and  growth  under  these 
influences  and  are  affected  by  them  in  their  immaturity 
and  weakness  when  they  have  not  as  yet  gained  power 
to  resist.  Freedom  is  not  the  absolute  power  that  some 
persons  think  it  to  be.  Let  the  child  grow  up  in  an 
absolutely  holy  envii-onment  like  that  of  heaven,  and  in 
all  probability — perhaps  I  should  say  in  all  certainty — he 
would  always  make  the  holy  choice.  He  would  not  be 
such  a  fool  as  to  use  his  freedom  in  any  other  way.  But 
here  it  is  different.  "  The  web  of  our  life  is  a  mingled 
yarn,  good  and  ill  together."  Sin  does  not  stand  alone ;  in 
every  soul  it  is  connected  with  much  that  is  good.  When 
we  speak  of  the  universality  of  sin,  we  do  not  mean  a  sin 
that  shuts  out  all  good  ;  we  do  not  mean  the  unmixed  sin 
of  those  beings  who  have  said, 

"  Evil,  be  thou  my  good  !  " 

Nevertheless,  when  all  is  said,  I  come  back  to  the  as- 
sertion that  there  is  an  inscrutable  element  in  the  fact 
before  us.  We  cannot  deny  the  universality  of  sin.  We 
may  not  deny  the  freedom  of  man  in  sinning.  If  the 
question  be  asked.  Why  not  ?  may  there  not  be  a  sin  that 
is  not  free  ?  I  answer,  No — such  a  sin  is  not  a  sin  in  any 
ti-ue  sense  of  the  word  ;  conscience  does  not  condemn  us 
for  it,  we  cannot  believe  that  God  holds  us  responsible 
for  it.  There  are  difficulties  on  both  sides  of  every  great 
question.  Our  duty  is  to  accept  the  side  that  presents  the 
fewest  difficulties.  To  my  mind  the  few  difficulties  \vhich 
are  connected  with  the  admission  that  there  is  a  free 
choice  in  every  sin  are  as  nothing  compared  with  the 
difficulties  which  arise  upon  the  opposite  assumption. 


SIN   AND    man's    race   RELATIONS  341 

What,  then,  is  onr  doctrine  of  the  connection  between 
the  transgression  of  Adam  and  the  universal  sinfulness  of 
the  race  ?  It  is  simply  this :  As  the  result  of  Adam's 
sin,  all  men  come  into  the  world  with  a  corrupt  or  dis- 
ordered nature,  inherited  from  their  ancestors,  which,  in 
connection  with  the  sinful  influences  of  their  surround- 
ings, leads  them  all  into  sin.  But  this  disordered  nature 
is  only  the  occasion  of  their  sin,  while  the  true  cause  is 
their  free  choice. 

In  conclusion,  let  me  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  the 
effects  of  our  free  choice  and  the  effects  of  heredity  and 
environment  are  so  mixed  and  tangled  in  our  inner  life 
that  it  is  almost,  if  not  wholly,  impossible  to  separate 
them.  We  have  no  power  to  judge  each  other  ;  we  can- 
not rightly  judge  ourselves.  Only  He  who  has  made  us 
and  watched  over  us  from  the  beginning,  who  has  per- 
mitted the  evil  for  which  we  are  not  responsible  to  enter 
our  lives  and  has  surrounded  us  with  His  grace,  has  the 
knowledge  and  the  skill  to  unravel  the  tangled  skein  of 
our  inner  lives.  He  is  the  Judge.  When  our  hearts  con- 
demn us,  God  is  greater  than  our  hearts  and  knoweth  all 
things.  The  God-man  who  combines  in  his  exalted  per- 
son the  omniscience  and  the  perfect  righteousness  of  God 
with  the  human  experience  in  which  he  was  "  tempted  in 
all  points  like  as  w^e  are  yet  without  sin,"  will  conduct 
the  judgment  of  the  Last  Day.  The  lesson  of  our  sub- 
ject is  one  of  charity  for  each  other  and  great  compas- 
sion. We  are  none  of  us  free  from  sin ;  we  may  none 
of  us  judge  our  brother.  There  is  profound  theology 
and  philosophy,  as  well  as  fine  poetry,  in  the  words  of 
Robert  Burns ; 


'  Then  gently  scan  your  brother  man, 
Still  gentler  sister  woman, 
Though  they  may  gang  a  kennie  wrang, 
To  step  aside  is  human : 


342  PEESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

One  point  must  still  be  greatly  dark, 
The  moving  loTiy  they  do  it ; 

And  just  as  lamely  can  ye  mark 
How  far  perhaps  they  rue  it. 

"Who  made  the  heart,  'tis  He  alone 

Decidedly  can  try  us, 
He  knows  each  chord — its  various  tone, 

Each  spring — its  various  bias  : 
Then  at  the  balance  let's  be  mute. 

We  never  can  adjust  it : 
What's  doyie  we  partly  may  compute, 

But  know  not  what's  resisted." 


XIX. 

MAN'S  CONDITION  AS  A  SINNER 

The  patient  student  who  works  his  way  through  the 
long  and  vohiminous  history  of  the  doctrine  of  sin  is  im- 
pressed with  the  fact  that  most  of  the  theologians  who 
have  discussed  this  difficult  subject  have  fallen  into  one 
or  both  of  two  errors,  which  have  greatly  impaired  the 
value  of  their  conclusions.  In  the  first  place,  they  have 
ignored  the  divine  grace  in  their  consideration  of  sin. 
The  "  natural  man  "  whose  condition  they  have  portrayed 
is  a  sinner  utterly  separated  from  God  in  a  world  where 
the  only  divine  influences  are  punitive.  But  such  a  sinner 
is  an  imaginary  being,  not  a  real  one.  The  natural  man, 
as  he  actually  exists,  lives  in  a  world  whei-e  God's  grace, 
based  on  the  redemptive  work  of  Christ  and  administered 
by  Christ  through  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  everywhere  at  work. 
The  sinner  with  whom  we  have  to  do  is  not  the  soul  that 
is  irremediably  lost  and  shut  out  from  God's  presence,  but 
the  lost  soul  which  God  is  still  seeking,  the  one  lost  sheep 
for  whose  recovery  the  Good  Shepherd  has  left  the  ninety 
and  nine. 

The  other  error  has  been  the  shifting  of  the  emphasis 
of  the  doctrine  from  the  point  where  the  Bible  places  it, 
namely,  the  moral  condition  of  adult  and  fully  respon- 
sible sinners,  to  the  point  of  greatest  theological,  as  well 
as  philosophical  difficulty,  namely,  the  moral  condition  of 
infants  and  little  children.  Now  the  Bible  is  not  ad- 
dressed chiefly  to  children.  It  tells  us  almost  nothing 
about  infants,  except  to  assure  us,  in  the  Master's  name, 


344  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

that  "  Of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  The  children 
who  liave  come  to  the  age  when  they  "  know  good  and 
evil"  are  treated  as  sinners  and  as  needing  divine  grace, 
but  little  is  said  of  the  character  and  extent  of  their  sin. 
And  yet  most  of  the  theories  of  the  theologians  tui-n  upon 
the  condition  of  the  new-born  child  in  its  inward  state  and 
its  relation  to  God's  punitive  justice.  Dr.  Emmons  was 
so  perplexed  by  the  possibility  that  infants  might  live  for 
a  while  before  they  began  to  sin,  that  he  was  obliged  to 
have  recourse  to  the  hypothetical  annihilation  of  infants 
dying  in  this  undecided  state.  Now  I  do  not  say  that  the 
moral  state  of  little  children  is  not  a  legitimate  subject  for 
speculation  ;  we  have  ourselves  to  some  extent  considered 
it  in  the  last  chapter.  But  I  do  emphatically  deny  that  it 
is  the  important  element  in  the  doctrine.  We  can  afford  to 
confess  considerable  ignorance  respecting  the  moral  begin- 
nings and  early  development  of  children.  But  it  is  of  vital 
importance  that  we  should  have  decided  views  respecting 
the  moral  condition  of  those  who  have  come  to  years  of 
responsibility  and  to  whom  the  warnings  and  invitations 
of  the  Saviour  and  his  apostles  are  chiefly  addressed. 

Let  us  have  these  two  errors  in  mind  that  we  may 
avoid  them  in  dealing  with  the  subject  which  now  comes 
before  us,  namely,  the  condition  of  man  as  a  sinner. 

1.  Our  moral  development  takes  place  in  a  state  of  pro- 
bation. God  has  put  us  into  the  world  that  lie  might 
educate  us  for  His  kingdom,  that  is,  that  He  might  lead 
us  by  moral  and  spiritual  influences  to  freely  choose  and 
pursue  our  chief  end.  The  method  He  has  chosen  for  the 
attainment  of  this  result  is  education  by  probation.  I 
have  referred  to  this  divine  arrangement  when  treating  the 
subject  of  the  Fall,  and  have  incidentally  touched  npon  it 
in  the  attempt  to  explain  the  universality  of  sin.  Now  I 
wish  to  speak  of  man's  condition  as  a  sinner  imder  pro- 
bation. And  first,  let  us  ask,  what  is  meant  by  probation  ? 
Tlie  term  has  come  into  prominence  in  the  recent  dis- 


man's  condition  as  a  sinner  345 

cnssions  in  theology,  and  it  is  important  that  we  should 
clearly  understand  its  meaning.  Bishop  Butler,  who  per- 
haps more  than  any  other  man  has  been  instrumental  in 
bringing  this  conception  into  theological  currency,  says  : 
"  The  first  and  most  common  meaning  of  it  seems  to  be 
that  our  future  interest  is  now  depending,  and  depending 
upon  ourselves;  that  we  have  scope  and  opportunities 
here  for  that  good  and  bad  behavior  which  God  will  re- 
ward and  punish  hereafter ;  together  with  temptations  to 
one,  as  well  as  inducements  of  reason  to  the  other." 
Again,  he  speaks  of  it  as  "implying  in  it  trial,  difiiculties, 
and  danger  "  ("Analogy,"  Pt.  I.,  ch.  iv,).  The  peculiarity, 
then,  of  a  probation  is,  that  it  involves  the  decision  of  the 
will  respecting  the  great  ends  of  life  in  a  mixed  state.  On 
the  one  side  there  are  temptations  to  sin  ;  on  the  other, 
not  only  the  "  inducements  of  reason,"  of  which  Butler 
speaks,  but  all  the  varied  influences  of  the  divine  grace. 
Moreover,  probation  involves  a  mingling  of  natural  good 
and  evil.  On  the  one  side  are  the  common  mercies  of  life 
and  those  good  things  temporal  and  spiritual  which  are 
the  result  of  God's  grace  working  in  the  world.  On  the 
other,  are  the  evils  which  have  come  in  the  train  of  sin, 
and  which  are  the  manifestation  of  the  disorder  produced 
in  the  natural  world  by  sin.  Death  reigns  and  none  es- 
cape its  hand.  Pain  and  sorrow  are  everywhere.  We  are 
surrounded  by  discomforts,  difficulties,  perplexities,  dan- 
gers. Disease  is  at  work  on  every  side.  In  view  of  the 
solidarity  in  which  men  stand,  we  must  regard  these  evils 
as  entailed  upon  the  race.  It  is,  indeed,  true  that  in  the 
strict  sense  of  the  terms  sin,  guilt,  and  punishment,  they 
can  be  applied  only  to  the  free  acts  of  individuals  and  their 
personal  consequences.  But  there  is  a  true  sense,  though 
not  the  highest  and  strictest,  a  semi-figurative  use  of  lan- 
guage which  yet  conveys  a  most  important  truth,  in  which 
we  may  speak  of  a  race  sin,  a  race  guilt,  and  even  a  race 
punishment.     Just  so  far  as  the  individual  is  a  branch  of 


346  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

the  common  trunk  and  shares  the  general  life,  he  partakes 
of  and  is  immersed  in  the  common  moral  evil  and  its  ef- 
fects. He  belongs  to  a  fallen  race,  a  lost  world,  an  "  evil 
and  adulterous  generation."  Only  we  should  remember 
that  there  is  another  side  to  the  fact ;  through  Christ's  re- 
demptive work  the  influences  of  God's  grace  and  their  ef- 
fects are  operating  in  the  world.  In  the  same  semi-figu- 
rative but  real  sense  in  which  we  call  the  world  a  lost 
world  and  speak  of  a  race  punishment,  we  may  speak  of  a 
redeemed  world  and  a  race  redemption.  This  is  the  theme 
of  that  wonderful  passage  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans, 
"  O  wretched  man  that  I  am !  who  shall  deliver  me  from 
the  body  of  this  death?  1  thank  God  through  Jesus 
Christ  our  Lord "  (Eora.  vii.  24,  25).  The  corporate 
evil,  beginning  in  sin  and  running  out  into  death  and  its 
attendant  evils,  is  matched  by  the  corporate  blessings 
beginning  in  Christ's  ofiicial  obedience  and  running  out 
through  the  mediation  of  human  faith  and  holiness  into 
life  and  its  attendant  benefits.  "  As  through  one  trespass 
the  judgment  came  unto  all  men  to  condemnation  ;  even 
so  through  one  act  of  righteousness  the  free  gift  came 
unto  all  men  to  justification  of  life  "  (Rom.  v.  18). 

Now  in  giving  us  our  moral  development  in  a  world  in 
which  sin  and  grace  are  struggling  for  the  mastery  God 
undoubtedly  acted  with  deliberate  purpose  and  foresight. 
The  universal  sin  had  a  place  permissively  in  His  eternal 
decree,  and  He  arranged  the  world  with  reference  to  it. 
It  was  to  be  the  peculiarity  of  man  that,  being  a  sinner, 
he  should  make  his  decisions  and  attain  his  moral  and 
spiritual  maturity  in  a  mixed  state,  that  is,  through  a 
probation.  It  was  under  these  circumstances  that  God 
meant  to  establish  His  kingdom.  Undoubtedly  other 
methods  were  open  to  God.  He  seems  to  have  employed 
a  different  method  in  the  case  of  the  angels.  He  does  so 
in  the  case  of  the  human  beings  who  die  in  infancj'.  But 
there   is  every  reason  to  believe  that,  on  the  whole,  the 


man's  condition  as  a  sinner  347 

method  wliicli  God  has  employed  is  the  best  for  men 
who  were  to  be  sinners.  Perhaps  we  might  even  go  far- 
ther and  say  that  it  is  better  to  be  a  sinner  under  proba- 
tion than  to  be  sinless  without  probation  ;  but  I  realize  the 
difficulties  of  such  a  position  and  do  no  more  than  sug- 
gest it.  It  is  true  that  probation  involves  some  very  great 
risks.  It  involves  the  possibility  of  falling  into  irreme- 
diable sin  and  makes  such  a  fall  easy  enough  for  all  who 
yield  to  the  allurements  of  sin.  But,  on  the  other  hand, 
there  are  great  and  more  than  counterbalancing  possibil- 
ities, and  the  whole  power  of  God's  grace  is  enlisted  upon 
their  side  to  make  them  actual.  Even  the  evils  of  which 
we  have  spoken  are  made  means  of  good  in  God's  econ- 
omy of  probation.  Sin  itself,  the  one  absolute  evil,  can 
yet  be  overruled  for  good  in  the  individual  life,  as  it  is  in 
the  history  of  God's  kingdom.  God  can  turn  it  into  an 
incentive  to  holiness,  and  often  does  so.  This  is  particu- 
larly the  case  with  the  sins  of  frailty  which  play  so  large 
a  part  in  every  life  and  do  not  involve  an  irremediable 
breach  with  God.  There  is  truth  in  Longfellow's  version 
of  Augustin's  words, 

"  That  of  our  vices  we  can  frame 
A  ladder,  if  we  will  but  tread 
Beneath  our  feet  each  deed  of  shame." 

Then  those  evils  which  have  come  upon  the  world  in  con- 
sequence of  sin,  and  which  we  call  "natural"  to  distin- 
guish them  from  "  moral  "  evil,  or  sin  itself — these  evils, 
I  say,  are  intended  for  our  good,  in  so  far  as  they  are 
checks  upon  sin  and  means  of  discipline  and  training  in 
holiness.  Pain  and  sorrow  are  evil  in  themselves  and 
could  not  exist  in  a  perfect  world.  We  have  the  promise 
that  in  the  perfected  kingdom  of  God  they  will  be  done 
away.  In  the  heavenly  city  of  which  John  tells  us  in  the 
Revelation  there  shall  not  be  "  mourning  or  crying  or 
pain  any  more  "  (Rev,  xxi.  4).     But  in  such  a  world  as 


348  PRESENT   DAY    THEOLOGY 

this,  with  its  temptations  to  sin,  pain  and  sorrow  are  the 
divine  instruments  in  the  work  of  redemption.  "Where 
sin  gets  the  upper  hand,  and  the  soul  is  moving  steadily 
and  swiftly  toward  destruction,  God  calls  a  halt  by  send- 
ing sickness  or  some  other  form  of  trouble.  That  He 
may  strengthen  the  spiritual  life  of  His  children.  He  sub- 
jects them  to  the  discipline  of  suffering  or  bereavement. 
These  evils  may  come  as  the  direct  consequence  of  per- 
sonal sin,  or  they  may  come  as  the  result  of  the  corpo- 
rate sin  ;  they  may  come  according  to  the  uniformly  work- 
ing laws  of  the  material  and  moral  spheres,  or  they  may 
come  through  the  more  special  operation  of  the  divine 
providence  moving  freely  in  the  spheres  of  nature  and 
the  soul.  Where  the  sinner  is  separated  from  God  they 
bear  the  aspect  of  punishment,  since  they  have  their  ori- 
gin in  the  divine  displeasure  ;  what  we  have  called  in  a 
semi-figurative  sense  the  i-ace  punishment  may  thus,  with- 
out changing  its  outward  character,  become  a  personal 
punishment  in  the  strictest  sense  of  the  term.  Yet  even 
for  this  class  there  is  always,  while  the  period  of  proba- 
tion lasts,  an  element  of  grace  in  the  punishment.  Its 
object  is  to  lead  to  repentance — as  this  is  indeed  the  pri- 
mary object  of  all  punishment.  Where  the  sinner  is 
reconciled  to  God  and  united  to  Him  by  a  personal  faith 
these  evils  bear  the  character  not  of  punishment  but  of 
fatherly  chastisement,  and  are  tokens  of  the  divine  love. 
Tliey  may  even  be  inflicted,  or  permitted  to  come,  not  on 
account  of  any  particular  sins,  but  i-ather  for  the  strength- 
ening and  upbuilding  of  the  Christian  life  and  the  fitting 
for  service  in  God's  kingdom.  I  may  speak  in  similar 
language  of  death.  This  is  the  universal  consequence  of 
sin.  It  deserves,  if  anything  does,  to  be  called  the  race 
punishment,  and  certainly  should  be  so  called  if  we  are 
careful  to  understand  the  term  punishment  in  the  re- 
stricted sense  which  has  already  been  referred  to.  Death 
befalls  every  member  of  the  race,  alike  the  bad  and  the 


man's   CONDITION"   AS   A   SINNEK  349 

relatively  good.  Infants  nvIio  have  committed  no  per- 
sonal sins  nevertheless  die.  But  death  is,  on  the  whole, 
in  a  world  like  this,  a  blessing.  It  also  is  a  check  npon 
sin  and  an  incentive  to  holiness.  God  has  no  more  po- 
tent agency  in  bringiug  men  ont  of  their  sins  into  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.  The  fear  of  death  works  Math 
power  on  many  souls.  The  certainty  of  death  and  the 
uncertainty  of  the  time  when  it  may  come,  the  constant 
danger  of  it,  make  us  realize  that  we  have  here  no  abid- 
ing city,  turning  our  thoughts  from  the  things  seen  and 
temporal  to  the  things  not  seen  and  eternal.  The  death 
of  those  who  are  nearest  and  dearest  to  us  disengages  our 
affections  from  this  world.  In  view  of  the  great  tasks 
which  God  sets  before  us,  the  thought  of  death  makes  us 
say,  like  the  Master,  "  I  must  work  the  work  of  him  that 
sent  me,  while  it  is  day  :  the  night  cometh,  when  no  man 
can  work "  (John  ix.  4).  In  so  far  as  men  are  nnrecon- 
ciled  to  God,  death  is  to  them  not  merely  the  race  punish- 
ment but  a  personal  punishment,  which  carries  with  it 
"  the  dread  of  something  after  death."  To  God's  children, 
who  have  been  forgiven  and  taken  into  His  family  once 
more,  death  is  chastisement  and  discipline,  but  no  longer 
punishment.  "The  sting  of  death"  has  been  removed 
when  God's  displeasure  has  been  changed  into  favor. 
But  still  it  is  the  great  reminder  to  them  of  what  they 
are  apart  from  the  divine  grace. 

The  real  nature  of  this  probationary  state  in  which 
man,  the  sinner,  is  placed  becomes  manifest  when  we  view 
it  in  the  light  of  Christ's  earthly  life.  It  is  a  matter  of 
no  small  importance  that  the  one  perfect  man  passed 
through  the  same  probation  which  we  are  experiencing, 
and  that  he  was  made  perfect  through  its  sufferings  and 
its  death.  The  Saviour,  it  is  true,  was  not  here  from 
necessit}'-,  as  we  are.  He  humbled  himself  and  became 
subject  to  the  evils  of  this  life  for  our  sake,  not  for  his 
own.     But  there  is  deep  significance  in  the  fact  that  by 


350  PKESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

thus  submitting  to  the  trial,  the  temptations,  the  suffei'- 
ings,  the  contradiction  of  sinners  and  the  death,  which  be- 
long to  our  probation,  he  wrought  out  that  life  which  is  at 
once  our  pattern  and  the  pledge  of  our  final  redemption. 
lie  showed  that  these  things  are  not  evil  in  themselves, 
but  onlj  when  the  free-will  yields  to  them  and  so  makes 
them  evil.  To  him  the  promise  M-as  fulfilled  in  all  its 
completeness,  that  "all  things  work  together  for  good  to 
them  that  love  God  "  (Rom.  viii.  28).  In  a  different  world 
there  could  have  been  no  such  Redeemer,  and  in  a  world 
where  the  Master  was,  it  is  good  for  the  disciple  to  be  ; 
where  the  One  has  triumphed,  the  other  can  be  "more 
than  conqueror  "  through  his  grace. 

II.  In  presenting  the  subject  of  probation  I  have  so  far 
anticipated  topics  which  belong  to  a  later  stage  of  our 
discussion  as  to  speak  of  the  believer  as  well  as  of  the  still 
unforgiven  sinner.  But  our  concern  at  present  is  with  the 
latter,  the  so-called  "natural  man."  The  point  I  wish 
now  to  make  is,  that  the  unconverted  sinner  is  wholly  al- 
ienated from  God.  "VVe  have  seen  that  there  are  certain 
generic  or  ultimate  choices  which  constitute  character  and 
give  moral  tone  to  extensive  departments  of  a  man's  life. 
These  determine  the  nature  of  the  subordinate  choices 
which  are  auxiliary  to  them.  We  have  also  seen  that 
there  must  be  a  supreme  choice  wliich  will  dominate  the 
whole  spiritual  and  moral  life.  "When  the  issue  is  fairly 
presented  to  any  soul,  God  or  self,  the  kingdom  or  the 
world,  a  man's  will  must  accept  one  side  or  the  other  of 
the  alternative.  There  is  and  can  be  no  middle  ground  ; 
we  cannot  serve  God  and  Mammon.  But  this  supreme 
choice  will  inevitably  affect  all  the  choices  which  are  sub- 
ordinate to  it,  that  is  to  say,  all  the  other  choices  of  the 
man,  with  their  accompanying  volitions  and  acts.  This  is 
a  necessity  of  our  moral  constitution,  and  is  characteristic 
of  that  free  personality  which  makes  the  difference  be- 
tween man   and  the  animal.  '  Now  let  a  man's  supreme 


man's    CONDITIOISr   AS   A    SINNER  351 

choice  have  for  its  end  not  the  true  chief  end  of  man,  the 
kingdom  of  God  and  His  righteousness,  but  self  and  the 
world — let  it,  in  other  words,  be  a  sinful  choice — and  all 
the  man's  subordinate  choices,  with  their  corresponding 
volitions  and  acts,  will  be  influenced  by  it.  There  will  be 
a  taint  of  sin  in  everything  that  such  a  man  chooses  and 
everything  that  he  does.  His  moral  life  is  poisoned  at 
the  fountain,  and  every  drop  in  the  stream  which  flows 
from  it  is  infected.  The  unregenerate  sinner  may  do 
many  pure  and  noble  acts,  but  since  they  are  not  done 
with  the  highest  motive,  namely,  from  love  to  God,  there 
will  be  this  defect  in  them.  God  alone  may  perceive  it, 
but  it  is  there.  Such  a  man  may  have  kept  all  the  com- 
mandments from  his  youth  up,  yet  the  Master  will  say  to 
him,  "  One  thing  thou  lackest,"  and  that  one  thing  will 
be  the  highest  good,  without  which  every  other  good  is 
imperfect  and  to  some  extent  evil. 

This  alienation  from  God  involved  in  a  wrong  supreme 
choice,  and  manifesting  itself  in  all  the  choices  and  acts, 
constitutes  that  condition  which  theology  technically  calls 
total  depravity.  The  term  is  an  unfortunate  one,  because 
it  conveys  a  false,  or,  at  the  least,  an  ambiguous  meaning. 
In  the  popular  conception  the  word  depravity  is  synony- 
mous with  wickedness,  and  the  doctrine  of  total  deprav- 
ity is  supposed  to  teach  that  the  unconverted  man  is  as 
wicked  as  he  can  be,  a  monster  of  sin,  in  whom  there  is 
nothing  good.  In  spite  of  all  assurances  to  the  contrary, 
many  good  Christian  persons  suppose  this  to  be  the  teach- 
ing of  orthodox  theologians.  As  soon  as  a  technical  term 
comes  to  convey  a  wholly  false  meaning,  it  has  outlived 
its  usefulness,  and  there  is  no  reason  why  we  should  hold 
on  to  this  and  thereby  lay  ourselves  open  to  all  sorts  of 
misapprehensions.  Let  the  term  total  depravity  go.  At 
the  same  time,  however,  we  must  be  careful  that  we  do 
not,  to  use  the  expressive  phrase  of  the  Germans,  "  empty 
out  the  child  with  tlie  bath."     By  whatever  name  we  call 


352  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

it,  there  is  a  real  truth  here,  of  vast  importance  in  our 
Cliristiaii  teaching  and  preaching.  The  nnforgiven  sinner 
stands  in  a  wholly  false  relation  to  God,  the  main  purpose 
of  his  life  is  utterly  wrong,  and  every  thought  and  word 
and  act  is  affected  by  it.  lie  may  be  good  in  all  his  re- 
lations to  his  fellow-men,  so  far  as  the  world  can  judge, 
but  while  he  is  all  wrong  toward  God,  there  is  an  evil 
virus  even  in  these. 

In  taking  this  position  we  need  not  ignore  the  good 
there  is  in  such  a  man ;  on  the  contraiy,  we  ought  to  be 
able  to  appreciate  it  more  truly  at  its  real  worth.  The 
good  act  of  an  unconverted  sinner  is  better  than  a  bad  act. 
The  pure,  high,  true,  and  noble  deeds  of  such  a  person 
have  their  intrinsic  value,  and  should  receive  the  com- 
mendation of  every  lover  of  good  and  truth.  There  is  a 
vast  amount  of  real  unselfishness  and  integrity  and  truth- 
fulness and  purity  among  those  who  are  still  separated 
from  God.  All  this  has  its  moral  value,  and  even  its  cer- 
tain reward.  Nay,  such  character  and  acts  may  pave  the 
way  for  a  truly  Christian  life.  Often  the  good  lives  of 
unbelievers  have  been  the  silver  steps  up  which  they  have 
been  led  by  God's  grace  to  the  golden  throne  of  a  Christian 
life.  The  Christian  will,  if  he  be  a  true  Christian,  be  the 
first  to  recognize  and  approve  such  lives.  Doubtless  God 
does  the  same.  There  is  a  profound  lesson  in  the  Gospel 
narrative  of  our  Saviour's  meeting  with  the  rich  young 
man.  Jesus,  we  are  told,  "  beholding  him,  loved  him." 
He  was  not  far  from  the  kingdom  of  God  (Mark  x.  21). 
But  when  all  credit  has  been  given  to  the  good  qualities 
and  acts  of  the  unconverted  man,  there  is  still  left  this 
fatal  defect,  this  deep-lying  evil.  "We  need  to  bear  this  in 
mind  in  our  Christian  teaching  and  preaching,  and  with- 
out ceasing,  to  urge  the  sinner  first  of  all  to  be  reconciled 
with  God. 

The  statements  I  have  made  need  to  be  somewhat  qual- 
ified with  reference  to  the  points  referred  to  in  the  begin- 


man's  condition  as  a  sinner  353 

ning  of  this  chapter.  In  what  has  been  said  I  have 
spoken  not  of  infants  or  little  children,  bnt  of  persons  who 
have  reached  such  a  degree  of  moral  maturity  as  to  be 
able  to  make  the  great  choice  of  life.  I  do  not  undertake 
to  say  when  that  maturity  is  reached.  Doubtless  some  at- 
tain it  much  earlier  than  others.  The  supreme  choice  of 
life  does  not  require  the  same  experience  of  the  world  and 
intellectual  advancement  as  some  of  the  other  important 
choices  which  we  have  to  make.  But  the  mind  develops 
slowly,  and  the  development  of  freedom  advances  jpari 
jpassii  with  the  other  powers.  It  would  be  doing  violence 
to  the  simplest  facts  of  psychology  to  say  that  little  chil- 
dren, who  have  not  reached  the  point  where  they  can 
make  any  of  the  great  choices  of  life,  whose  wills  are  still 
to  a  great  extent  enwrapped  in  the  parental  will,  and 
whose  choices  have  to  be  largely  made  for  them,  are 
wholly  alienated  from  God.  Character  has  not  yet  been 
formed,  and  unity  has  not  come  into  their  moral  and  spirit- 
ual life.  They  are  doubtless  sinners  and  do  many  things 
against  their  consciences  ;  they  do  those  things  which  they 
ought  not  to  do,  and  leave  undone  those  things  that  they 
ought  to  do.  But  the  great  issue  of  life  lies  before  them. 
If  tliey  are  being  brought  up  under  consecrated  parental 
nurture,  their  growing  freedom  may  be  so  guided  from 
stage  to  stage  that  they  will  never  wander  from  the  fold 
of  the  Good  Shepherd  ;  but  when  the  time  of  full  respon- 
sibility comes  they  will,  as  a  matter  of  course,  and  with 
scarcely  the  consciousness  of  a  struggle,  confirm  the  paren- 
tal choice  of  the  supreme  Good,  made  for  them  in  their 
helpless  infancy  and  publicly  sealed  by  baptism.  But  even 
if  this  is  not  the  case,  even  though  all  the  influences  about- 
them  may  be  debasing,  they  have  not  yet  reached  the 
point  of  free  and  deliberate  rejection  of  God.  There  have 
been  Christians  in  times  past  who  have  taught  that  little 
children  are  totally  depraved  ;  perhaps  there  are  those 
who  teach  it  still.  But  I  need  scarcely  say  that  there  is 
23 


354  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

not  a  hint  of  such  a  doctrine  in  the  Bible,  and  that  it  finds 
no  support  in  experience.  The  little  ones  are  sinners  and 
need  a  Saviour,  but  they  still  are  guiltless  of  the  "  great 
transgression."  We  maj  say  of  them,  as  our  Saviour  liini- 
self  said,  "  Of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven  "  (Matt.  xix. 
li).  Tlie  modern  evangelical  church  has  recognized  this 
truth  in  its  now  universal  doctrine  of  the  salvation  of  in- 
fants and  children  dying  before  the  age  of  responsibility. 

Another  qualification  must  be  made  in  our  doctrine.  It 
is  not  to  be  forgotten  that  the  sinner  is  still  in  a  state  of 
probation.  The  condition  in  which  he  finds  himself  is 
one  of  mixed  influences,  sin  on  one  side,  God's  grace  on 
the  other.  This  is  the  time  of  decision,  the  day  of  grace. 
While  there  is  life  the  gates  of  mercy  remain  open  and 
God's  invitations  are  given.  The  supreme  choice  may 
have  been  made,  and  made  against  God,  but  there  are 
still  opportunities  and  motives  to  reverse  this  choice. 
Men  are  free,  and  so  long  as  God  gives  their  freedom  the 
field  in  which  to  operate,  they  can  choose  in  either  way. 
The  divine  forbearance  waits  long,  and  many  are  the  souls 
M'ho  by  His  grace  are  brought,  after  years  of  sinful  living, 
to  give  themselves  to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  I  do  not 
deny  that  men  may,  to  all  intents  and  purposes,  irrevocably 
commit  themselves,  even  in  this  life,  but  the  Bible  does 
not  seem  to  me  to  teach  that  God  utterly  forsakes  any  soul 
so  long  as  the  probationarj^  period  continues.  But  there 
is  a  different  state  of  things  in  the  other  world.  The  time 
of  probation  is  ended.  The  invitations  of  God's  grace  are 
no  longer  given.  In  the  sinner's  environment  there  are  no 
holy  influences.  He  is  still  free.  He  could,  if  he  would, 
still  turn  from  sin  to  God,  but  in  the  absence  of  the  mo- 
tives of  God's  grace  he  has  no  desire  to  do  so,  or  if  he  has 
some  feeble  desire,  it  is  not  deep-rooted  in  his  moral  nat- 
ure. In  this  state  the  choice  is  fixed,  and  there  is  a  moral 
certainty  that  it  will  lemain  so.  Here,  then,  we  have  an 
alienation  from  God  that  is  not  only  complete  but  fixed 


( 


man's  condition  as  a  sinner  355 

and  ii-remediable.  This  is  a  very  different  state  of  things 
from  that  which  exists  in  this  life,  with  its  probationary 
character,  and  the  two  states  should  not  be  confounded. 
It  is  one  thing  to  be  lost ;  it  is  another  to  be  finally  lost. 

III.  Moreover,  the  unforgiven  sinner  rests  under  the  di- 
vine displeasure  and  is  exposed  to  the  divine  punishment. 
I  have  already  touched  upon  this  subject  in  a  previous 
chapter,  but  I  wish  to  speak  of  it  more  particularly  here. 
We  have  seen  that  God's  displeasure  is  the  root  of  all 
punishment,  that  it  is  this  which  makes  the  outward  evils 
which  befall  the  sinner  punishments  in  the  true  sense  of 
the  word.  JSTow  the  "  wrath  of  God,"  His  holy  displeas- 
ure, abideth  on  the  unforgiven  sinner.  He  is  in  a  state 
of  punishment.  All  the  evils  of  life  bear  this  character. 
Death,  which  hangs  over  him  like  a  dark  pall,  or  like  a 
coming  storm  whose  black  clouds  are  soon  to  break  over 
him,  is  penal  to  him.  Then,  in  addition  to  these  earthly 
punishments,  the  doom  of  eternal  death  rests  upon  him. 
This  is  not  the  place  to  consider  the  subject  of  retribution 
in  all  its  length  and  breadth,  but  it  should  be  asserted 
here  with  emphasis.  The  unfoi'given  sinner  is  a  doomed 
man.  He  has  nothing  to  plead  in  stay  of  the  punishment 
which  awaits  him.  He  is  under  condemnation.  The  di- 
vine law,  which  is  holy,  just,  and  good,  condemns  him,  for 
he  has  not  kept  it  and  is  resisting  its  fundamental  com- 
mand of  love  to  God.  Still  more  does  the  Gospel  of  God's 
grace  through  Jesus  Christ  condemn  him.  To  such  a  man 
"  our  God  is  a  consuming  fire,"  and  there  is  "  a  fearful 
looking-for  of  judgment."  Practically  he  is  judged  al- 
ready. To  all  intents  and  purposes  he  has  judged  himself. 
For  judgment  is  not  external  to  a  man,  but  is  rooted  in  his 
sin. 

But  while  emphasizing  this  solemn  truth,  let  me  say 
again  that  I  am  not  speaking  of  little  children.  So  far  as 
children  are  sinners,  God's  displeasure  rests  upon  them 
in  a  degree  and  to  an  extent  proportionate  to  their  sin  and 


356  PKESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

guilt,  botli  of  which  I  should  be  far  from  denying.  But 
God's  displeasure  is  a  matter  of  degree.  The  displeasure 
that  involves  condemnation  to  eternal  punishment  may  be 
the  same  in  kind  with  that  M'hich  is  called  forth  by  the 
angry  word  of  a  three-year-old  child,  but  it  is  not  the 
^me  in  degree.  Eternal  punishment  is  not  threatened  iu 
the  Bible  against  little  children.  God  punishes  them 
according  to  their  deserts,  when  He  punishes  them  at 
all,  and  we  have  reason  to  believe  that  on  the  ground  of 
Christ's  sacrifice  of  atonement  He  saves  them  when  they 
die  in  the  period  of  partial  responsibility.  Moreover,  the 
condition  of  the  unforgiven  sinner,  as  exposed  to  eternal 
punishment,  is  very  different  from  that  of  the  sinnei'  in 
the  other  world,  who  has  already  entered  into  his  final 
punishment.  God's  wrath  does  not  work  itself  out  in 
this  probationary  period.  He  waits  still  to  be  gracious. 
He  desireth  not  the  death  of  the  sinner.  He  mingles 
even  punishment  with  grace.  He  is  still  a  Father  and 
bestows  upon  the  prodigal  all  the  love  and  grace  that  are 
possible  while  he  is  still  recreant.  In  wrath  He  still  re- 
members mercy. 

lY.  Once  more,  the  unconverted  sinner  is  unable  to 
attain  his  chief  end  apart  from  God's  redemptive  grace. 
Inability  is  not  inconsistent  with  freedom.  In  order  that 
we  may  choose,  the  objects  of  choice  must  be  within  our 
knowledge  and  our  reach.  Otherwise  we  liave  no  motive 
to  choose,  and  choice  without  motives  is  at  once  ii-rational 
and  impossible.  I  am  perfectly  free  to  choose  to  go  to 
London  to-morrow,  but  if  I  have  no  money  to  go,  and  no 
reasonable  expectation  of  getting  any,  if  duty  and  conven- 
ience alike  keep  me  here,  if,  moreover,  the  thought  of 
going  has  never  entered  my  mind,  I  shall  be  without  mo- 
tives to  go,  and  so  unable  to  use  my  freedom  in  choice. 
But  suppose  a  friend  brings  me  a  thousand  dollars  and 
tells  me  how  all  my  work  at  home  may  be  provided  for, 
and  urges  me  to  go  on  account  of  my  health,  and  sets  be- 


MAN'S   COlSTDITIOlSr   AS   A   SINNER  357 

fore  me  the  pleasures  of  the  journey,  then  all  at  once  the 
clioice  that  was  before  practically  impossible  becomes  pos- 
sible. There  is  no  change  in  my  freedom,  but  there  is  a 
great  change  in  the  conditions  for  its  operation.  Before, 
I  was  free  but  unable — that  is,  unable  to  use  my  freedom. 
Now,  I  am  both  free  and  able.  But  mark  that  the  ina- 
bility under  which  I  labored  was  not  a  physical  inability 
but  a  moral  inability.*  Now  the  sinner,  by  his  sin  has 
fallen  into  a  state  of  inability.  lie  is  unable  to  keep 
God's  law.  He  is  unable  to  attain  salvation.  His  free- 
will remains,  but  he  is  in  no  condition  to  exercise  it  in 
this  sphere  of  activity.  By  his  sin  he  has  separated  him- 
self from  God.  But  man  is  so  constituted  that  he  cannot 
attain  his  chief  end  apart  from  God  and  out  of  commu- 
nion with  Him.  Moreover,  he  cannot  of  himself  come 
once  more  into  communion  with  God.  It  takes  two  to 
make  a  quarrel  and  it  takes  two  to  make  a  reconciliation. 
The  sinner  must  be  forgiven  and  restored  to  God's  favor 
before  he  can  enter  again  upon  the  pursuit  of  his  chief 
end.  But  he  cannot  make  God  forgive  him.  God  must 
decide  what  He  will  do  and  what  He  will  not  do.  It  is  a 
condition  of  things  very  like  what  often  occurs  in  our 
human  relations.  One  man  wrongs  another  and  the  two 
become  alienated.  The  wrong-doer  may  desire  to  have 
the  old  relations  restored,  but  he  cannot  restore  them  un- 
less the  wronged  party  comes  voluntarily  to  meet  him. 
He  is  free,  but  he  is  utterly  unable  to  live  in  the  old  rela- 
tions. No  physical  power  is  of  any  avail  here.  The  wall 
between  the  two  men  is  an  invisible  one,  but  not  all  the 
steam-engines  in  the  world  could  supply  power  enough  to 
pull  it  down.  Yet  let  the  man  who  has  been  wronged 
say  the  one  word,  "  I  forgive  you,"  and  the  wall  falls 
of  itself.     Now,  such  is  our  relation  to  God.     We  cannot 

*  "  Has  the  sinner  '  power  to  the  contrary  ?  '  "  Wliat  do  you  mean — 
power  of  choice,  or  power  of  action  ?  The  former  he  has,  the  hatter 
he  has  not.     (A  pencilled  note  hy  the  author.) 


S58  PRESENT   DAY   TITEOLOOY 

come  back  to  Ilim  unless  lie  is  Avilliiiii;  to  forgive  and  re- 
store us,  and  we  are  entirely  dependent  upon  liini  in  the 
matter.  If  lie  does  not  grant  His  grace,  if  He  does  not 
furnish  some  basis  for  reconciliation  and  offer  His  for- 
giveness to  us,  we  must  remain  forever  separated  from 
Him.  The  inability  is  not  a  physical  or  natural  inability; 
it  is  a  moral  inability,  but  it  is  stronger  than  any  physical 
force  could  render  it.  The  sinner  in  the  presence  of  the 
requirements  of  God's  law  finds  himself  compelled  to  say, 
in  the  language  of  Paul,  "  I  am  carnal,  sold  under  sin  " 
(Rom.  vii.  14).  He  is,  in  the  impressive  words  of  the 
Saviour,  "  the  slave  of  sin  "  (John  viii.  34).  He  is  also 
responsible  and  guilty,  for  his  own  sin  has  brought  him 
into  this  condition,  and  we  are  responsible  not  only  for 
our  choices  but  for  the  results  of  those  choices. 

This  is  one  of  the  vital  truths  of  the  Christian  sj'stem. 
The  great  central  fact  of  the  Gospel,  redemption  by 
Ciirist,  is  conditioned  upon  the  utter  moral  helplessness 
of  the  sinner  apart  from  Christ.  Once  teach  that  lie  is 
able  in  his  own  strength  to  work  out  his  salvation,  and  the 
whole  Gospel  system  is  undermined  and  brought  to  de- 
struction. Nevertheless,  here,  too,  we  must  make  some 
needful  qualification,  1  am  speaking  here  of  the  mature 
sinner  and  not  of  the  child.  I  do  not  deny  that  the  cor- 
rupt nature  which  the  child  inherits  is  a  hindrance  to  its 
spii'itual  cai'eer,  and  that  God's  grace  is  needful  for  the  for- 
giveness of  its  sins.  There  is  a  relative  inability  in  the 
little  child,  due  rather  to  nature  than  to  choice,  or  only 
partially  due  to  choice,  which  ought  not  to  be  ignored. 
But  the  utter  helplessness  of  the  fully  responsible  sinner 
is  not  merely  the  result  of  nature  within  and  the  sinful  en- 
vironment, not  merely  the  result  of  the  sins  of  infirmity 
which  characterize  childhood,  but  still  more  the  result  of 
his  mature  fi'ee  choice,  Christ  said  to  his  disciples,  "Ex- 
cept ye  turn  and  become  as  little  children,  ye  shall  in  no- 
wise enter  into  the  kiuiidom  of  heaven."     1  do  not  believe 


man's  condition  as  a  sinner  359 

that  tliis  saying  teaches  the  sinlessness  of  children,  but  it 
does  seem  to  imply  that  there  are  hindrances  in  mature 
years  which  are  not  present  in  childhood.  Yet  let  me  not 
be  misunderstood.  I  am  ready  to  admit  that  even  the 
child's  sin  raises  a  barrier  between  it  and  God  wliich  He 
alone  can  throw  down. 

AVe  must  not,  however,  look  at  the  sinner's  inability 
alone  and  by  itself.  God  has  not  left  His  children  in 
the  helplessness  into  which  they  have  fallen.  "  While  we 
were  yet  sinners  Christ  died  for  us  "  (Rom.  v.  8).  Through 
the  Saviour's  redemptive  work  God  has  provided  atone- 
ment and  reconciliation.  What  we  could  not  do  He  has 
done  for  us.  He  so  loved  the  world — this  guilty,  fallen, 
helpless  world  —  that  He  gave  His  only  -  begotten  Son. 
Christ  has  tasted  death  for  every  man.  His  work  is  uni- 
versal in  its  scope.  Every  hindrance  in  God  to  the  sinner's 
reconciliation  is  removed.  It  is  true  that  this  work  of  God 
through  Christ  is  not  made  known  to  every  inan,  that 
there  are  millions  of  the  human  race  to  whom  the  blessed 
Gospel  has  never  come.  Nevertheless,  we  have  reason  to 
believe  that  in  some  way  or  other  God  gives  the  benefit 
of  Christ's  work  to  every  soul,  so  that  no  soul  is  left  in  its 
helplessness  and  guilt.  We  believe  this  not  because  it 
would  not  be  just  for  God  to  leave  the  sinner  to  the  con- 
sequence of  his  sins — otherwise  grace  would  be  no  more 
grace — but  because  it  would  not  be  like  God  to  do  so, 
because  it  would  not  be  in  accordance  with  the  love 
and  mercy  which  have  been  revealed  through  Christ, 
and  because  the  New  Testament  gives  such  abundant  rea- 
son to  regard  the  work  of  Christ  as  universal  in  its  intent. 
But  the  sinner  is  shut  up  to  the  way  God  has  opened. 
"  There  is  no  other  name  under  heaven,  given  among  men, 
whereby  we  must  be  saved."  Even  those  who  never  learn 
of  Christ  here,  will,  if  they  are  saved,  wake  up  on  the 
other  side  to  find  themselves  in  his  arms  and  cleansed  by 
his  blood. 


860  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

I  ouglit  also,  as  J  have  done  befoi-e,  to  distinguish  be- 
tween the  sinner's  state  nnder  probation  and  in  tlie  otlier 
life.  The  inability  under  which  the  unregenerate  man 
labors  in  this  life  is  indeed  absolute  in  the  sense  that  it 
shuts  him  out  from  all  possible  self-salvation.  But  it  is,  as 
we  have  just  seen,  met  and  provided  for  bj  God's  grace. 
AVhen  the  divine  help  comes  to  him  his  freedom  is  per- 
fectly competent  to  the  acceptance  which  God  requires. 
Like  a  compass  needle  which  has  been  held  in  a  wrong 
position  by  a  concealed  mass  of  iron,  but  which  swings 
freely  when  it  is  removed,  the  will  which  has  been  para- 
lyzed 01-  rendered  unable  to  act  b}'  the  sinful  choice,  be- 
comes free  to  choose  under  the  influence  of  God's  grace. 
Very  different,  however,  is  the  state  of  things  in  the  other 
world.  There  the  sinner  who  has  rejected  the  utmost  in- 
fluences of  the  divine  grace,  is  left  to  himself,  and  his  in- 
ability has  nothing  to  counterbalance  it.  He  is  still  free, 
no  physical  inability  prevents  his  choice,  but  there  is  a 
moral  inability  which  leaves  him  hopeless.  That  is  the 
awful  feature  of  that  awful  state.  The  sinner  is  what  he 
is  and  where  he  is,  because  he  will  not  seek  God,  and  yet 
he  is  in  a  position,  brought  about  by  his  own  free  choice, 
where,  morally  speaking,  he  cannot  do  other  than  he  does. 

The  sul)jcct  with  which  we  have  been  engaged  gives  us 
our  transition  to  the  doctrine  of  redemption.  Already  we 
have  to  some  extent  anticipated  it.  Wo  are  thus  the  bet- 
ter prepared  to  enter  upon  the  examination  of  it.  We  are 
all  sinners.  We  are  in  a  state  of  j^robation.  Apart  from 
God's  grace  we  are  altogether  alienated  from  our  heaven- 
ly Father,  under  His  displeasure,  doomed  to  punishment, 
helpless  in  our  sin.  Looking  at  the  one  side  alone,  we  may 
well  cry,  "  ()  wi'etched  man  that  I  am  !  who  shall  deliver 
me  ?  "  But  blessed  be  God,  we  can  reply  to  our  own  ques- 
tion, "I  thank  God,  throuirh  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord!" 


XX. 

THE  REDEMPTIVE  WORK  OF  CHRIST* 

(1.  Revelation  and  Atonement) 

In  onr  theological  inquiries  we  have  thns  far  kept 
steadily  in  view  the  chief  end  of  God's  plan  and  of  man's 
existence,  the  redemptive  kingdom  of  God.  We  have 
seen  that  this  chief  end  implied  the  existence  of  sin,  not 
as  desired  by  God,  nor  as  in  any  way  due  to  His  efficiency, 
but  as  the  result  of  the  abuse  of  human  freedom  permit- 
ted by  God  because  He  meant  by  His  grace  to  overrule  it 
for  a  higher  good.  We  have  seen  that  sin  is  hateful  to 
God,  and  that  it  renders  the  sinnei"  guilty  and  helpless  be- 
fore Him.  l^ow  we  have  come  to  the  point  where  we 
shall  consider  God's  provision  for  the  redemption  of  the 
sinner  from  his  sin  —  or,  as  I  should  say,  broadening 
the  subject  to  its  full  diniensions,  for  the  redemption  of 
the  lost  and  guilty  world.  It  is  by  this  provision  that  the 
foundation  for  God's  kingdom  has  been  laid,  and  that  the 
kingdom  has  been  rendered  possible  in  this  world  of  sin- 
ners. 

The  term  redemption,  as  used  in  theology,  is  one  of 
very  comprehensive  meaning.  It  includes  not  only  all 
that  God  has  done  and  will  do  for  the  deliverance  of  man- 
kind, but  the  actual  deliverance  itself.  When  it  is  com- 
plete, those  who  have  accepted  God's  grace  will  be  freed 
from    the   guilt   and  power   of  sin,    canied  on  to  their 

*  For  a  further  presentation  of  the  subject  by  the  author,  the  reader 
is  referred  to  a  sermon  published  in  Tlie  Word  and  Work,  Bangor,  Me., 
March,  1892,  and  to  the  Andover  Review,  vol.  v.,  p.  44. 


362  PRESENT   DAY   TTTEOLOGY 

spiritual  destination,  delivered  from  punislnncnt,  made 
conquerors  bj  the  resurrection  over  death,  and  made  par- 
takers of  tlie  heavenly  blessedness.  The  race  as  a  whole 
will  be  delivered  from  sin  and  all  its  consequences,  and 
carried  forward  to  its  goal.  Physical  nature,  so  far  as  its 
destiny  is  bound  up  with  that  of  man,  will  be  delivered 
from  the  bondage  of  corruption.  The  sin  and  evil  still 
left  in  the  universe  will  be  conquered  atid  reduced  to  com- 
plete subjection,  and  finally  excluded  from  the  domain  of 
holiness  and  love.  In  a  word,  the  kingdom  of  God,  with 
the  completion  of  redemption,  will  have  come  in  all  its 
fulness,  and  that  prayer  which  Christ  taught  us  will  be 
answered.  In  this  broad  sense  of  the  term  we  shall  be 
concerned  with  the  subject  of  redemption  during  all  the 
remainder  of  our  inquiries.  It  is  customary,  however,  to 
distinguish  between  the  provision  for  redemption  and  the 
actual  carrying  out  of  that  provision.  The  two  branches 
of  the  divine  work  are  not  wholly  separable,  and  no  sharp 
line  can  be  drawn  between  them.  N^evertheless,  the  dis- 
tinction is  a  good  one.  For  the  present,  then,  we  shall  be 
engaged  only  with  the  first  of  the  two  aspects  of  re- 
demption, namely,  the  divine  provision  for  the  salvation 
of  mankind. 

If  our  time  permitted  a  complete  exhibition  of  the  sub- 
ject, we  should  go  back  to  the  beginnings  of  human 
history.  The  provision  for  redemption  antedated  the 
Fall.  Believers  were  chosen  in  Christ  before  the  founda- 
tion of  the  world  (Eph.  i.  4).  Our  first  parents  had  not 
been  expelled  from  Paradise  when  the  redemptive  woi-k 
began.  To  present  the  subject  fully,  it  would  be  needful 
to  trace  the  whole  process  of  divine  grace  throughout  the 
history  of  the  Old  Dispensation.  But  for  our  purposes  it 
will  be  sufficient  to  consider  the  work  of  Jesus  Christ  the 
Redeemer.  In  him  and  his  w^ork  the  whole  redemption 
is  concentrated.  All  that  preceded  finds  its  fulfilment 
and  its  deepest  meaning  in  his  saving  deeds. 


THE   KEDEMPTIVE   WORK   OF   CHRIST  363 

I.  It  is  important  that  we  sliould  niiclcrstaiid  Christ's 
work  ill  its  completeness.  It  is  so  large,  so  manj-sided,  and 
so  comprehensive,  that  we  are  apt  to  look  only  at  individ- 
ual aspects  of  it,  and  as  a  result  to  fall  into  imperfect  and 
even  erroneous  views  respecting  it.  The  traditional  theol- 
ogy has  endeavored  to  avoid  this  danger  by  distinguishing 
three  factors  in  the  Saviour's  work,  namel}^,  what  he  did 
as  a  Prophet,  a  Priest,  and  a  King.  These  so-called  "  of- 
fices "  of  Christ  do  not  furnish  us  with  an  exhaustive  an- 
alysis of  his  works,  but  they  are  admirably  fitted  to  guard 
us  against  the  one-sided  view  of  which  I  have  spoken,  and 
most  theologians  avail  themselves  of  their  use.  We  say 
substantially  the  same  thing  when  we  distinguish  in  the 
Saviour's  work  the  elements  of  revelation,  atonement,  and 
direct  work  in  and  upon  individuals  and  the  world. 

These  tiiree  factors  in  the  Saviour's  woi-k  may  in  a 
general  way  be  arranged  chronologically.  His  public 
ministry  on  earth  is  especially  connected  with  his  pro- 
phetic activity.  His  priestly  work  is  naturally  associated 
with  his  death.  The  resurrection  and  ascension  were  the 
introduction  to  his  kingly  functions  in  their  highest  exer- 
cise. Nevertheless,  while  this  is  the  case,  all  three  ele- 
ments are  present  during  the  whole  of  tlie  Saviour's  of- 
ficial activity.  One  is  more  prominent  than  the  rest,  but 
all  are  there.  Everywhere  in  the  cord  by  which  the  Sav- 
iour has  bound  together  heaven  and  earth  these  three 
strands  are  visible.  During  his  ministry  Christ  not  only 
revealed  God  and  preached  the  Gospel ;  he  also  took  upon 
him  the  sins  of  mankind  and  shared  their  sufferings,  he 
interceded  for  them  with  the  Father,  and  as  a  Puler  over 
nature  and  man  he  performed  his  miracles,  drew  all  men 
unto  him  and  exercised  royal  dominion  over  all  who  were 
of  the  truth.  The  death  of  Christ  not  only  effected  atone- 
ment, but  was  a  profound  revelation  of  the  divine  love  and 
a  glorification  of  the  Saviour  (John  xii.  23  ;  xiii.  31),  so 
that  in  a  true  sense  the  cross  was  his  throne.     Now  that 


364  PRESENT  DAT  THEOLOGY 

he  sits  at  God's  right  hand  and  rules  as  the  Messiah  over 
the  universe  and  in  his  church,  he  reveals  the  divine  char- 
acter and  will  through  his  Spirit,  and  in  his  priestly  inter- 
cession carries  on  his  atoning  sacrifice. 

It  is  needful  that  we  should  keep  in  mind  all  these 
features  of  the  Saviour's  redemption.  In  all  these  ways 
he  saves  us.  If  any  one  of  the  thi-ee  great  factors  in  his 
work  be  neglected,  our  understanding  of  this  great  doc- 
trine will  be  imperfect.  Almost  all  the  errors  into  which 
theologians  have  fallen  upon  this  subject  have  resulted 
from  asserting  one  of  the  three  elements  at  the  expense 
of  the  rest.  It  has  been  thus  especially  that  confusion 
has  been  introduced  into  the  doctrine  of  the  atonement. 
The  subject  of  Christ's  redemptive  work  is  a  large  and 
complicated  one.  It  is  easy  to  become  so  absorbed  in  the 
details  as  to  lose  sight  of  the  great  outlines.  We  shall  do 
well  to  be  on  our  ffuard  ao;ainst  the  danger. 

But  while  all  of  these  factors  in  Christ's  saving  work 
need  to  be  borne  in  mind,  it  is  to  be  noted  that  a  special 
and  central  importance  belongs  to  the  atonement.  In  this, 
as  in  neither  of  the  others,  the  saving  power  of  Christ's 
redemption  is  concentrated.  The  revelation  is  pre-emi- 
nently a  disclosure  of  God's  atoning  love.  The  kingly 
functions  of  the  ascended  Lord  are  based  upon  the  atone- 
ment and  involve  its  application  to  mankind.  The  death 
of  Jesus  is  the  great  central  fact  of  redemption.  There 
is  a  sense  in  which  we  can  know  nothing,  while  engaged 
with  this  doctrine,  but  Christ  and  him  crucified. 

IL  We  shall  look  first  at  Christ's  work  as  revelation — 
the  so-called  prophetical  office.  Old  Testauient  prophecy 
— taking  the  term  in  its  larger  sense  as  inclusive  of  all 
the  divine  self-revelation  through  inspired  men — antici- 
pates and  prepares  the  way  for  this  part  of  our  Saviour's 
work.  We  can,  indeed,  say  with  truth,  that  the  prophecy 
of  the  Old  Dispensation  was  itself  his  work,  since  the 
prophets  uttered  their  messages  through  the  "  Spirit  of 


i 


I 


THE    KEDEMPTIVE    WORK    OF    CHRIST  365 

Christ "  (1  Pet.  i.  11).  The  divine  Logos  from  the  first 
manifested  God  to  men.  In  the  Saviour's  ministry,  as 
has  ah'eady  been  stated,  the  prophetical  function  was  tlic 
most  prominent  one. 

Among  tlie  various  forms  of  Christ's  work  as  revela- 
tion the  first  which  meets  us  is  his  doctrine.  He  was  pre- 
eminently a  teacher.  He  came  to  men  not  only  with  the 
divine  grace,  but  with  the  divine  truth,  not  only  with  life, 
but  with  light  (John  i.  4,  14).  From  the  first  the  Word 
plays  a  most  important  part  in  the  work  of  redemption. 
Men  cannot  be  saved  by  truth  alone.  Socrates  thought 
that  they  could,  and  that  all  that  is  needful  for  mankind 
in  order  to  njoral  betterment  is  the  knowledge  of  what  is 
right ;  but  his  theory  failed  in  practice  because  men  are 
not  merely  ignorant,  but  also  wilfully  sinful.  Yet  truth 
has  its  place  in  the  work  of  salvation.  It  is  the  pioneer  ;  it 
opens  the  way  for  the  entrance  of  the  divine  grace.  Be- 
cause men  are  rational  they  must  be  approached  through 
the  reason  ;  thus  only  can  access  be  gained  to  the  heart. 
Christianity  has  always  had  a  preaching  element  in  it,  and 
always  will  have  until  its  task  is  completed.  The  subject 
of  Christ's  teaching  was  the  Gospel — the  glad  tidings  of 
salvation.  He  proclaimed  the  coming  of  God's  kingdom, 
and  made  known  the  conditions  of  entrance  to  it.  He 
taught  men  the  high  and  blessed  truth  of  God's  Father- 
hood. He  taught  them  their  own  sin  and  the  abounding 
mercy  and  forgiveness  of  God.  He  told  them  of  his  aton- 
ing death  and  the  eternal  life  through  him.  He  unrolled 
to  them  the  future  of  his  kingdom.  How  could  the  saving 
work  be  accomplished  if  Christ  had  not  bestowed  upon 
mankind  this  precious  truth  of  the  Gospel  ? 

Again,  there  was  a  revelation  through  Christ's  person. 
I  have  treated  this  subject  in  the  chapters  on  Christology, 
and  may,  therefore,  pass  lightly  over  it  here.  But  it  is  a 
most  important  element  in  tlie  redemptive  work.  Christ 
himself,  this  divine  man,  was  to  his  contemporaries  and 


366  PRESENT    DAY    THEOLOGY 

to  all  ages  a  source  of  the  profoundest  knowledge  which 
mail  has  ever  received.  lie  was  a  revelation  of  God. 
His  words  to  Philip  point  to  this  great  truth  :  "  He  that 
hath  seen  me  hath  seen  the  Father  "  (John  xiv.  9).  A 
new  conception  of  the  divine  love  and  righteousness  and 
truth  dawned  upon  the  minds  of  those  who  saw  and 
heard  him,  as  it  dawns  upon  us  to-day  as  we  read  the 
Gospels. 

Moreover,  he  revealed  man  to  himself.  In  him  the 
ideal  of  humanity  became  real.  It  is  here  that  we  come 
into  contact  with  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  example,  which 
is  so  frequently  taught  in  the  New  Testament  and  im- 
pressed with  so  much  earnestness.  "  Let  this  mind  be  in 
you  which  was  also  in  Christ  Jesus"  (Phil.  ii.  5).  "Christ 
also  suffered  for  us,  leaving  us  an  example  that  ye  should 
follow  his  steps  "  (1  Pet.  ii.  21).  The  example  of  Christ 
has  been  represented  by  Unitarians  as  constituting  the 
essence  of  his  atonement,  and  as  a  result  evangelical  Chris- 
tians have  felt  a  certain  shyness  about  giving  the  doctrine 
its  place  among  the  elements  of  the  redemptive  work. 
But  miquestionably  it  has  a  place  among  them.  The  fault 
lies  not  in  saying  that  we  are  saved  by  the  example  of 
Christ,  for  that  is  perfectly  true  as  far  as  it  goes,  but  in 
stopping  short  there  and  making  that  the  whole.  The 
"  imitation  of  Christ "  is  necessary  to  the  full  salvation  of 
the  Christian,  though  it  must  be  based  upon  his  atoning 
sacrifice  and  his  kingly  grace  bestowed  through  the  Holy 
Spirit.  The  "new-man,"  the  "Christ  formed  within" 
the  Christian,  is  the  reproduction  of  the  perfect  manhood 
revealed  to  ns  in  the  Saviour's  holy  life. 

Once  more,  there  was  a  revelation  through  the  works 
of  Christ  which  forms  a  part  of  his  redemptive  activity. 
Ilis  miracles,  as  has  already  been  shown,  were  of  this 
nature.  They  made  known  the  redemptive  grace  of  God 
and  Christ  to  men  in  the  most  striking  and  convincing  of 
ways.     In  them  the  final  redemption  of  nature  was  guar- 


THE    REDEMPTIVE    WORK    OF    CHRIST  367 

aiiteed  and  the  salvation  of  the  soal  ilhistrated  and  proved 
by  the  salvation  of  the  body.  I^or  need  we  confine  oar 
thouo;ht  to  the  miracles.  All  the  deeds  of  the  Christ  were 
a  revelation.  His  ways  were  God's  ways,  and  they  were 
ways  of  grace  and  truth.  We  see  on  the  small  scale  of 
the  Master's  earthly  ministry  what  God  is  doing  on  the 
large  scale  in  the  redemptive  work  of  the  ascended  Christ. 
The  death  of  Christ,  the  great  atoning  deed,  is  the  crown- 
ing revelation. 

III.  We  come  now  to  Christ's  work  as  atonement — his 
priestly  office.  By  his  atonement  we  mean  that  part  of 
his  redemptive  work  which  had  for  its  object  the  securing 
of  the  forgiveness  of  human  sin,  or  the  provision  for 
reconciliation.  It  is  to  be  carefully  noted  that  the  atone- 
ment is  not  the  same  as  the  reconciliation.  The  former 
opens  the  way  for  the  latter  and  makes  it  possible ;  the 
latter  can  come  only  as  the  result  of  the  former.  The 
atonement  is  that  element  in  Christ's  work  by  which  it 
was  made  morally  possible  for  God  to  be  just  and  the 
sinner's  Justiiier  (Rom.  iii.  26),  the  atoning  act  was  the 
death  of  Christ  upon  the  cross. 

I  shall  devote  the  remainder  of  this  chapter  to  the 
presentation  of  the  scriptural  teachings  respecting  the 
Saviour's  atoning  work,  leaving  to  the  next  the  more  dis- 
tinctively doctrinal  treatment  of  the  subject. 

1.  The  doctrine  of  the  atonement  has  its  roots  in  the 
Old  Testament.  None  of  the  great  truths  of  Christianity 
is  more  fully  anticipated  and  foreshadowed  in  the  earlier 
revelation  than  this.  We  may  distinguish  at  least  four 
distinct  lines  of  approach  to  the  New  Testament  doctrine. 

The  first  of  these  is  found — as  the  accepted  designation 
of  the  office  of  Christ  which  we  are  considering  indicates — 
in  the  Old  Testament  institution  of  priesthood,  and  espe- 
cially in  the  high-priesthood.  The  priests  differed  greatly 
from  the  two  other  classes  of  functionaries,  the  prophets 
and  kings.     These  latter  represented  God  before  men  in 


368  PEESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

revelation  and  govennnent.  The  priests,  on  the  contrary, 
though  in  lilce  manner  appointed  by  God,  represented  men 
before  God.  It  was  tlieir  duty  to  stand  between  the  sin- 
ful people  and  the  holy  Being  against  whom  they  had 
transgressed,  and  to  present  the  sacrifices  wliich  the  Law 
prescribed  for  the  removal  of  guilt  and  the  obtaining  of 
foigiveness.  Theoretically  all  the  Israelites  were  priests, 
as  they  were  prophets  and  kings,  but  practically,  since 
they  were  all  sinful  and  thus  far  from  the  ideal,  only  a 
single  tribe  were  designated  to  this  office,  and  of  this  tribe 
only  a  single  family  performed  the  more  sacred  offices  of 
the  priesthood.  Everything  in  the  priestly  ordinances 
and  ritual  tended  to  emphasize  their  holiness.  They 
must  be  without  physical  blemish,  of  blameless  life,  and 
during  the  exercise  of  their  priestly  functions  must  refrain 
from  wine  or  strong  drink.  They  were  solemnly  conse- 
crated and  set  apart  to  their  office,  with  rites  which  were 
intended  to  bring  distinctly  into  view  the  sacredness  of 
their  work.  At  their  head  was  the  high-priest,  the  great 
official  representative  of  the  people  in  matters  of  sin  and 
atonement  and  in  the  sacrificial  ritual.  It  was  he  who 
went  once  a  j'^ear  into  the  holy  of  holies  of  the  tabernacle 
and  temple  and  presented  the  sacrificial  blood  before  the 
mercy-seat,  upon  which  appeared  the  Shekhina,  the  visi- 
ble token  of  the  divine  presence. 

The  second  line  of  approach  to  the  New  Testament 
doctrine  of  atonement  is  closely  related  to  the  first.  It  is 
found  in  the  Old  Testament  sacrificial  system.  The 
essential  idea  of  sacrifice  is  self-surrender.  Man  expresses 
his  dependence  upon  God  and  devotion  to  Him  by  the 
gift  of  something  precious  to  him.  The  gift  symbolizes 
and  declares  the  gift  of  his  will,  himself,  to  God.  But 
since  men  are  sinners  and  separated  from  God  something 
more  than  this  is  necessary.  Some  atonement  must  be 
rendered  tliat  so  the  divine  displeasure  may  be  removed, 
the  oifender's  sin  forgotten,  and  he  be  restored  to  fellow- 


THE   REDEMPTIVE    WORK    OF    CHRIST  369 

ship  with  God.  In  the  sacrifices  of  tlie  heathen  the  need 
of  atonement  is  expressed  and  an  attempt  is  made  to 
render  it.  The  Jewish  sacrificial  system  differs  from  the 
heathen  in  tiiat  it  is  a  divine  provision  for  meeting  this 
human  need.  The  virtue  of  the  offering  lies  not  in  its  in- 
trinsic value,  but  in  the  divine  ordainment  on  the  ground 
of  which  it  is  offered  and  accepted.  God  gave  to  His  chil- 
dren this  method  of  securing  forgiveness  for  their  sins. 
The  blood  of  bulls  and  of  goats  accomplished  nothing,  but 
was  made  the  means  by  which  the  repentant  soul  obtained 
God's  blessing ;  God  gave  it  its  value  as  an  atonement. 

Let  us  stop  for  a  moment  to  look  at  the  ritual  of 
the  sin-offering,  in  which  the  idea  of  atonement  is  ex- 
pressed with  especial  fulness.  The  offerer  brought  an 
animal,  of  certain  prescribed  kinds  and  without  blem- 
ish, to  the  tabernacle  or  temple,  and  presented  it  for 
sacrifice.  He  laid  his  hands  upon  its  head  and  solemnly 
set  it  apart  for  its  appointed  use.  It  was  to  be  his  offer- 
ing, to  take  his  place  before  God.  He  then  killed  it. 
The  priest,  who  was  standing  by,  caught  the  blood  in  a 
basin  and  presented  it  to  God  by  carrying  it  into  the  holy 
place  and  sprinkling  or  rubbing  it  upon  the  horns  of  the 
altar.  The  significance  of  the  act  lay  in  the  use  that  was 
made  of  the  blood.  "  The  life  of  the  flesh  is  in  the  blood ; 
and  I  have  given  it  to  you  upon  the  altar  to  make  atone- 
ment for  your  souls;  for  it  is  the  blood  that  maketli 
atonement  by  reason  of  the  life  "  (Lev.  xvii.  11).  This  is 
the  key-passage  which  opens  the  Old  Testament  doctrine. 
The  word  translated  atonement  means  a  covering.  The 
pure  blood  of  the  victim  is  represented  as  covering 
before  God  the  impure  life  of  the  sinner,  and  so  making 
it  possible  and  right  for  God  to  forgive  him.  The  sym- 
bolism of  the  sacrifice  is  "  a  life  for  a  life,"  vicarious 
atonement,  atonement  by  substitution.  Kot  that  there  is 
a  real  and  valid  substitution  here ;  therein  lies  the  imper- 
fection of  the  animal  sacrifice  and  the  prophecv  of  a  bettei 
24 


370  PRESENT   DAY    THEOLOGY 

sacrifice  ;  but  God  graciously  accepts  it  as  sufficient.  The 
sacrifice  is  a  sacrament,  "  the  visible  sign  of  an  invisible 
grace ;  "  its  atoning  power  is  of  God's  appointment  and 
rests  upon  an  atonement  not  yet  revealed.  I  have  said 
that  the  sacrifice  involves  substitution,  that  it  is  vicarious. 
But  let  me  not  be  misunderstood.  I  do  not  wish  to  teach, 
as  some  do,  that  we  are  to  find  in  it  a  vicarious  punish- 
ment, a  penal  substitution.  It  has  been  said  that  in  the 
symbolism  of  the  sacrifice  the  victim  bears  the  punishment 
of  death  due  to  the  sinner.  Of  this  there  is  not  a  hint 
in  the  Old  Testament.  It  is  not  a  death  for  a  death,  or 
a  punishment  for  a  punishment,  but  a  life  for  a  life.  Vi- 
carious atonement  and  vicarious  punishment  are  not  the 
same  thing. 

A  third  and  very  important  line  of  approach  to  the  Kew 
Testament  doctrine  is  to  be  found  in  the  teachings  respect- 
ing the  suffering  Messiah.  Alongside  of  the  teachings  of 
the  prophets  respecting  the  Messiah's  kingly  glorj^  there 
runs  a  sadder  strain,  a  i)rediction  of  pains  and  laboj's  and 
even  death  to  be  endured,  of  rejection  and  insult  from  his 
own  people.  The  twenty-second  Psalm  nai-i'ates  in  lan- 
guage Avhich  seems  more  like  historj^  than  prophecy  tlie 
incidents  of  the  crucifixion.  The  fifty-third  chapter  of 
Isaiah  recounts  the  sufferings  of  the  Servant  of  God, 
"  despised  and  rejected  of  men,  a  man  of  sorrows  and  ac- 
quainted with  grief ."  It  tells  us  in  unmistakable  language 
the  story  of  his  vicarious  death  for  our  sins,  how  "  he  was 
wounded  for  our  transgressions  and  bruised  for  our  iniqui- 
ties," how  "  tlie  chastisement  of  our  peace  was  upon  him, 
and  with  his  stripes  we  are  healed,"  how  "  the  Lord  hath 
laid  on  him  the  iniquity  of  ut  all."  The  circumstances  of 
his  shameful  death  are  predic:cd.  The  prophet  calls  him 
a  "guilt-offering,"  and  declares  that  "he  bare  the  sin  of 
many  and  made  intercession  fcr  the  transgressoi'S."  It 
would  be  difficult  to  express  in  a  clearer  language  the 
idea  of  a  vicarious  atonement. 


THE   KEDEMPTIVE   WORK    OF   CHRIST  371 

I  pass  over  the  other  predictions  regarding  the  suffer- 
ing Messiah  (such  as  Zech.  xii.  10-13  ;  xiii.  7),  and  turn  to 
the  last  element  in  the  Old  Testament  preparation  for  our 
doctrine,  namely,  the  teachings  respecting  intercession. 
All  through  the  earlier  dispensations  there  are  intimations 
of  the  truth  that  God's  servants,  who  are  dear  to  Him, 
can  stand  between  Him  and  their  sinful  brethren  and 
secure  forgiveness  for  them.  To  nse  the  Old  Testament 
phraseology,  such  an  intercessor,  where  his  plea  is  ac- 
cepted, renders  atonement  for  his  client's  sin  (Ex.  xxxii. 
30  ;  Numbers  xxv.  13).  Abrahan],  Moses,  Phinel^,as,  Sam- 
uel, and  David  are  represented  as  thus  making  interces- 
sion, standing  before  God  in  this  vicarious  capacity  as  the 
representatives  of  their  sinful  fellow-men.  The  under- 
lying idea  is  the  same  as  that  of  the  priesthood  ;  but 
there  is  this  difference,  that  while  the  priests  brought  out- 
ward and  tangible  offerings  of  atonement,  the  intercessor 
brought  his  own  will,  a  spiritual  sacrifice,  to  atone  for  his 
brother's  sin. 

2.  We  come  now  to  the  New  Testament  teachings  re- 
specting the  Saviour's  atoning  work.  Here  we  are  per- 
plexed by  the  embarrassment  of  riches.  No  doctrine  of 
the  Christian  system  is  more  fully  taught  than  this.  The 
Saviour's  death,  "  Christ  crucified,"  is  the  great  theme  of 
the  New  Testament,  as  through  type  and  prediction  it  is 
the  hope  of  the  Old.  It  is  also  taught  distinctly.  A  fair 
and  intelligent  exegesis  cannot  fail  to  find  in  the  teachings 
of  Christ  and  the  Apostles  upon  this  subject  the  doctrine 
of  a  vicarious  atonement,  that  is,  an  atonement  through 
substitution.  I  make  this  assertion  with  the  knowledge 
that  it  will  be  disputed  by  many  evangelical  scholars,  but 
with  the  full  conviction  that  it  is  true — though  in  thus 
speaking,  let  me  again  disclaim  any  thought  of  asserting 
that  the  Bible  teaches  the  doctrine  of  "penal  substitution," 
as  it  is  called. 

Let  us  begin  with  the  fii'st  three  Gospels.     The  angels 


372  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

who  announce  the  Saviour's  advent  foretell  his  redemp- 
tive work.  "  Thou  shalt  call  his  name  Jesus  ;  for  it  is  he 
that  shall  save  his  people  from  their  sins  "  (Matt.  i.  21). 
"  There  is  born  to  you  this  day,  in  the  city  of  David,  a 
Saviour"  (Luke  ii.  11).  The  Master  did  not  speak  of  his 
death  and  its  meaning  as  an  atonement  in  the  earlier  part 
of  his  ministr}'.  Here  was  a  truth  too  deep  and  mj'steri- 
ous  for  his  disciples  to  bear  at  first.  But  it  is  interesting 
to  notice  that  as  soon  as  he  liad  in  some  measure  dispelled 
the  false  notions  of  the  Twelve  respecting  his  Messiahship, 
and  had  ^-eceived  from  Peter,  as  their  spokesman,  the 
great  Confession,  he  began  to  tell  them  of  the  death 
which  "  it  was  necessary  "  that  he  should  suffer,  and  of  the 
cross  which  was  to  teach  mankind  that  "  whosoever  would 
save  his  life  shall  lose  it,  and  that  whosoever  shall  lose  his 
life  .  .  .  shall  find  it"  (Matt.  xvi.  21-26).  On  the  solenni 
Mount  of  Transfiguration,  when  a  glimpse  is  given  to  the 
awe-struck  disciples  of  the  kingly  glory  of  the  Messiah  and 
his  relation  to  the  Old  Dispensation,  the  subject  of  con- 
versation between  the  Saviour  and  the  two  repi-esentatives 
of  the  older  revelation  is  "  his  decease  which  he  was  about 
to  accomplish  at  Jerusalem  "  (Luke  ix.  31).  The  references 
to  his  death  now  grow  more  frequent.  The  unseemly 
ambition  of  some  of  his  followers  and  the  jealousy  of 
others  gave  occasion  for  the  saying  that  "  the  Son  of  Man 
came  not  to  be  ministered  unto  but  to  minister,  and  to  give 
his  life  a  ransom  for  many  "  (Matt.  xx.  28 ;  Mark  x.  -15). 
The  word  "  ransom "  designates  the  price  paid  for  the 
release  of  the  firstborn  of  Israel,  who  M'ere  dedicated  to 
God,  or  for  the  redemption  of  a  slave  from  bondage 
(Numb,  xviii.  15,  16  ;  xxxv.  31,  32  ;  Lev.  xxv.  J:7-55). 
In  the  Hebrew  the  saihe  root  is  employed  to  convey  the 
idea  of  atonement.  The  idea  conveyed  in  the  Saviour's 
words  is  that  of  substitution,  the  vicarious  idea.  His 
life  was  to  be  the  ])rice  paid  for  the  deliverance  of  men 
from  sin,  a  price  that  was  at  the  same  time  a  sacrifice. 


THE    llEDEMPTIVE   WORK    OF    CTTRTST  873 

Amid  the  sacred  scenes  of  the  Last  Supper,  and  in  con- 
nection witli  the  institution  of  the  rite  which  was  to  be 
to*Cliristians  in  all  ages  a  solemn  memorial  of  Christ,  he 
still  further  unbosomed  himself.  The  sacrificial  sj'stem 
which  was  prominently  before  their  minds  in  connection 
with  the  Passover  meal  which  they  were  now  eating,  was 
about  to  be  done  away,  because  the  antitype  had  come  and 
the  type  was  no  longer  needful.  The  symbol  was  to  find 
its  fulfilment  and  realization.  As  the  Old  Dispensation 
in  its  legal  form  had  been  founded  upon  sacrifice,  so  was 
the  New  presently  to  be.  Slaughtered  beasts  furnished 
the  blood  of  the  Old  Covenant  (Ex.  xxiv.  3-S) ;  the  blood 
of  Christ  himself  was  to  be  shed  for  the  institution  of 
that  New  Covenant,  promised  by  the  prophets  (Jer.  xxxi. 
31-34),  and  now  about  to  be  realized.  His  death  was  the 
vicarious  atonement  which  effected  all  that  the  old  sacri- 
ficial system  symbolized,  and  established  the  kingdom  of 
God — or,  to  put  it  into  the  simplest  language,  his  death 
was  to  secure  for  mankind  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  open 
the  way  for  their  complete  salvation  from  the  guilt  and 
power  of  sin.  The  rite  he  now  instituted  was  to  be  the 
constant  reminder  of  this  truth,  as  well  as  a  means  by 
which  the  benefits  of  the  Saviom-'s  death  might  be  be- 
stowed upon  believers.  "  This  is  my  body  broken  for 
you."  "  This  is  my  blood  of  the  New  Covenant,  which 
is  shed  for  many  unto  remission  of  sins "  (Matt.  xxvi. 
26-29,  and  parallel  passages).  The  importance  of  this  tes- 
timony cannot  be  overestimated.  One  of  the  two  great 
rites  of  the  Christian  church  is  built  upon  the  doctrine  of 
the  Trinity ;  the  other  upon  the  doctrine  of  vicarious 
atonement.  The  agony  in  the  Garden  gives  us  a  hint  of 
the  mysterious  nature  of  the  Saviour's  death.  It  was  not 
an  ordinary  death.  His  words  of  intercession  for  his  ene- 
mies, uttered  on  the  cross,  permit  us  to  look  far  into  the 
atoning  consciousness  of  the  Saviour  (Luke  xxiii.  34).  His 
cr}^  of  anguish,  "  My  God,  my  God,  why  hast  thou  for- 


874  PRESENT   DAY    THEOLOGY 

saken  mc?"  reveals  the  vicarious  snifei-er  immersed  in  tlie 
tide  of  human  sin  and  divine  pnnisliment,  so  as  for  a 
moment  to  seem  to  himself,  though  not  in  reality,  under 
the  divine  displeasni-e  as  resting  on  himself  personally. 

In  John's  Gospel  we  find  material  for  the  understand- 
ing of  our  doctrine  no  less  important  than  that  furnished 
by  the  Synoptical  evangelists.  At  the  beginning  of  the 
Saviour's  ministry  the  Baptist  publicly  denominated  him 
"the  Lamb  of  God  that  taketh  away  tlie  sin  of  the  world," 
identifying  him  with  the  Servant  of  God  predicted  in 
Isaiah,  of  whom  it  is  said  that  he  was  "  brought  as  a 
lamb  to  the  slaughter,"  and  that  he  should  "make  his 
soul  a  trespass-offei'ing  "  (Isa.  liii.  7,  10),  representing  him 
as  the  vicarious  sufferer  and  sacrifice  for  liuman  sin.  So 
later  in  the  Saviour's  ministry,  the  high-priest,  Caiaphas, 
prophes3'ing  in  his  official  capacity,  and  with  a  depth  of 
meaning  far  beyond  his  own  thought,  foretold  his  vica- 
rious death  for  his  people.  John  reports  a  number  of 
striking  utterances  of  Jesus  bearing  upon  his  atonement. 
In  liis  discourse  with  Nicodemus  Christ  compared  his 
death  upon  the  cross  to  the  brazen  serpent  which  Moses 
at  God's  command  raised  in  the  wilderness  for  the  healing 
of  the  stricken  Israelites:  "As  Moses  lifted  up  the  ser- 
pent in  the  wilderness,  even  so  must  the  Son  of  Man  be 
lifted  up,  that  whosoever  believeth  may  in  him  have 
eternal  life"  (John  iii.  14  seq.  ;  Numb.  xxi.  4-0).  lie 
declares  that  he  is  "  the  bread  of  life,"  and  adds  by  way 
of  explanation,  "the  bread  that  I  will  give  is  my  flesh, 
which  I  will  give  for  the  life  of  the  world  "  (John  vi. 
51).  He  likens  himself  to  the  Good  Shepherd,  who  giv- 
eth  or  layetli  down  his  life  for  the  sheep,  a  life  which 
lie  saj's  he  lays  down  of  himself,  since  he  has  the  right 
to  lay  it  down  and  to  take  it  again  (John  x.  11,  15,  18). 
He  illustrated  his  death  by  the  simile  of  the  grain  of 
wheat  which  bears  its  fi'uit  only  when  it  is  cast  into  the 
earth  and  dies,  declared  that  the  hour  of  his  death  M'as 


THE   REDEMPTIVE    WOKK    OF    CHRIST  375 

the  liour  of  his  glorification,  and  in  full  assurance  of  his 
coming  victory  over  the  powers  of  evil  said,  "  I,  if  I  be 
lifted  np  from  the  earth,  will  draw  all  men  nnto  me" 
(John  xii.  24-33).  At  the  last  interview  with  his  dis- 
ciples he  told  them  that  he  was  about  to  lay  down  his 
life  in  behalf  of  his  friends.  The  so-called  "  high-priestly 
prayer,""  which  John  has  recorded  in  the  seventeenth  chap- 
ter of  his  Gospel,  shows  ns  with  what  thoughts  and  aspira- 
tions the  Saviour  looked  forward  to  his  approaching  death. 
Speaking  of  the  disciples  he  said,  "  For  their  sake  I  sanc- 
tify myself,"  employing  the  word  which  designated  the 
consecration  of  the  sacrificial  victim  about  to  be  offered 
upon  the  altar. 

I  am  at  a  loss  how  to  select  among  the  many  references 
to  the  Saviour's  atoning  death  in  the  other  books  of  the 
New  Testament.  The  doctrine  underlies  all  the  apostolic 
teaching  and  preaching.  It  is  of  fundamental  importance 
in  Paul's  great  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith.  After 
having  shown  in  the  opening  chapters  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Romans  that  Gentiles  and  Jews  alike  liave  "  sinned 
and  come  short  of  the  glory  of  God,"  he  goes  on  to  de- 
clare that  men  can  be  justified  and  forgiven  only  by  God's 
grace  "  through  the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ  Jesus  ; 
whom  God  set  forth  to  be  a  propitiation,  through  faith, 
by  his  blood  "  (Rom.  iii.  24,  25).  Redemption,  propitia- 
tion, blood — the  terms  are  taken  from  the  ritual  ordinances 
of  the  Old  Dispensation,  and  represent  Christ's  death  as  a 
vicarious  or  sacrificial  atonement.  l!^o  language  could  be 
used  which  would  more  distinctly  convey  this  idea  to  a 
Jewish  mind.  Moreovei-,  he  gives  the  reason  why  God 
has  thus  "  set  forth "  Christ  as  an  atoning  sacrifice,  "  to 
show  his  righteousness,  because  of  the  passing  over  of  the 
sins  done  aforetime,  in  the  forbearance  of  God ;  for  the 
showing,  1  say,  of  his  righteousness  at  this  present  sea- 
son :  that  he  might  himself  be  just  and  the  justifier  of 
him  that  hath  faith  in  Jesus  "  (Rom.  iii.  25,  26).     The 


876  PTIKSENT    DAY    THEOLOGY 

righteousness  spoken  of  is  God's  judicial  riu:;liteonsness, 
which  seems  to  have  suffered  detriment  from  Imman  sin, 
hnt  which  is  now  shown  to  liave  received  atonement 
throngli  tlie  death  of  Christ,  witli  tlie  result  that  God  can 
without  injury  to  His  holiness  give  free  play  to  His  for- 
giving grace  toward  all  those  who  believe  in  tlie  crucified 
and  living  Lord.  Tliere  is  abundant  proof  without  this 
passage  of  the  doctrine  before  us,  but  there  is  no  state- 
ment of  it  in  the  New  Testament  moi'o  full  and  unequiv- 
ocal than  this.  Here,  as  nowhere  else,  the  death  of  Clirist 
is  represented,  to  borrow  the  words  of  Tholuck,  as  "the 
divine  Theodicee^''  the  vindication  of  the  divine  justice  in 
the  forgiveness  of  sins. 

In  the  fifth  chaptci-  of  the  same  epistle  Paul  shows 
liow  the  atonement  has  its  oi-igin  in  the  undeserved 
love  of  God,  who  "  commendeth  liis  love  toward  ns,  in 
that,  while  we  were  yet  sinners,  Christ  died  for  us " 
(v.  8).  If  we  are  ever  tempted  to  yield  to  that  popular 
and  yet  most  erroneous  idea  that  in  tlie  doctrine  of  the 
atonement  God  the  Father  is  represented  as  the  angiy 
God,  to  whom  God  the  Son  makes  propitiation,  this 
passage  should  disprove  it.  The  atonement  oi-iginates 
in  the  love  of  the  Fathei',  as  the  holiness  to  wliich  the 
atonement  is  made  belongs  to  the  Son  equally  with  the 
Father:  "God  so  loved  the  world  that  he  gave  his  Son." 
The  Saviour's  work  is  here  represented  as  a  finished  re- 
conciliation. By  it  God  has  come  into  an  attitude  of  re- 
conciliation toward  men.  The  atonement  is  objective,  the 
reconciliation  made  once  for  all.  In  potency  and  promise 
the  I'ace  is  reconciled  to  God,  and  all  that  individual  sin- 
ners Jiave  to  do  is  by  faith  to  accept  the  reconciliation 
(vv.  10,  11).  In  the  great  parallel  between  Adam  and 
Christ  which  follows,  Paul  shows  that  the  benefits  which 
liave  accrued  to  mankind  from  Christ's  work  (which  is 
here  called  his  "obedience  '')  far  exceed  the  evils  that  have 
been  entailed  by  the  Fall,  and  carries  further  the  thought 


TTTE    Ry.nEMPTIVE    WORK    OF    OTTRTRT  377 

that  tlie  race  stands  in  a  redeemed  relation  to  God  tlirongli 
Christ — a  relation  which  of  coni'se  does  not  relieve  the  in- 
dividual from  the  necessity  of  personal  faith  as  the  sole 
condition  of  sharing  in  the  saving  benefits  of  this  relation 
(Rom.  V.  12-21).  In  the  same  epistle  Paul  shows  that  the 
fiual  cause  of  the  atonement  is  holiness,  or  the  fulfilment 
of  God's  will  in  His  kingdom  :  "  What  the  law  could  not 
do,  in  that  it  was  weak  through  the  flesh,  God,  sending 
his  own  Son  in  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh,  and  for  sin, 
condemned  sin  in  the  flesh  :  that  the  ordinance  of  the 
law  might  be  fulfilled  in  us,  who  walk  not  after  the  flesh, 
but  after  the  Spirit "  (Rom.  viii.  3,  4). 

I  will  allude  to  only  one  more  passage  out  of  the  many 
which  occur  in  the  Pauline  writings.  It  is  that  in  the  Sec- 
ond Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  (v.  14-21),  where  the  Apostle 
urges  the  great  Christian  motive  arising  fi-om  the  love  of 
Christ  manifested  in  his  atoning  death.  He  died  for  all, 
and  so  close  is  his  relation  to  all  that  it  may  be  truly  said 
that  all  died  in  his  death.  Since  he  performed  the  atoning 
act  in  their  behalf  it  was  constructively  their  act.  In  this 
passage  he  once  more  represents  Christ's  work  as  a  finished 
reconciliation  :  "  God  was  in  Christ  reconciling  the  world 
nnto  himself,"  He  has  given  to  His  servants  the  adminis- 
tration of  this  reconciliation.  They  go  to  sinful  men  with 
the  ofl^er  of  it,  beseeching  them  that,  since  God  has  done 
His  part,  they  will  do  theirs  and  "  be  reconciled  to  God." 
Then  he  further  describes  the  atonement  in  words  which 
unmistakably  teach  its  vicarious  or  substitutional  character, 
though  leaving  the  origination,  and  in  large  part  the  exe- 
cution, in  God's  hands,  "  Him  who  knew  no  sin  he  made 
to  be  sin  on  our  behalf,  that  we  might  become  the  right- 
eousness of  God  in  him  " — that  is,  God  put  the  sinless  One 
in  some  true  sense  into  the  sinner's  place,  treating  him  as 
if  he  were  a  sinner,  that  the  sinner  through  faith  in  him 
might  be  in  some  true  sense  put  into  his  place,  and  though 
sinful  be  treated  as  if  righteous.     This  is  not  vicarious 


378  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

punishment,  but  at  the  very  least  it  is  vicarious  atone- 
ment. 

The  unknown  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  lias 
given  us  a  complete  and  most  important  exposition  of 
Christ's  atoning  death  in  its  relation  to  the  Old  Testa- 
ment ceremonial  system.  He  follows  especially  upon  those 
two  lines  of  approach  to  the  Kew  Testament  doctrine,  of 
which  mention  has  already  been  made,  the  high-piiest- 
hood  and  the  sacrifices.  Christ  in  his  death  is  at  once 
high-priest  and  sacrifice ;  he  presents  the  atonement  and 
is  the  atonement.  He  is  "  a  mei'cifnl  and  faithful  high- 
priest  in  things  pertaining  to  God,  to  make  propitiation 
for  the  sins  of  the  people"  (Heb.  ii.  17).  For  this  office 
the  Saviour  was  prepared  by  his  temptations  and  sufferings 
(ii.  18 ;  V,  8).  His  superiority  to  the  high-priest  of  the 
Old  Testament  is  demonstrated.  He  is  a  high-priest  after 
a  different  order,  namely,  that  of  Melchizedek  (v.  1-10). 
He  did  not  need  to  offer  up  sacrifices  for  his  own  sins, 
seeing  that  he  was  sinless,  but  made  one  all-sufficient  sac- 
rifice when  he  offered  up  himself  (vii.  26,  27).  The  Old 
Testament  sacrifices  were  intrinsically  insufficient ;  "the 
blood  of  bulls  and  of  goats  could  not  take  away  sin  " 
(x.  4).  But  Christ  was  the  perfect  sacrifice.  The  old 
sacrifices  had  to  be  offered  over  and  over  again.  The 
high-priest  year  after  year  went  into  the  holy  of  holies 
with  the  sacrificial  blood  on  the  great  day  of  atonement. 
But  Christ  has  been  offered  once  for  all  a  perfect  sacri- 
fice that  needs  not  to  be  repeated.  The  virtue  of  his  sacri- 
fice lay  in  the  perfect  surrender  of  his  will  to  God,  "  by 
the  which  will  we  have  been  sanctified  through  the  offer- 
ing of  the  body  of  Christ  once  for  all "  (x.  5-10).  So  hav- 
ing offered  one  sacrifice  for  sins  forever,  he  has  sat  down 
on  the  right  hand  of  God,  from  henceforth  expecting  till 
his  enemies  be  made  the  footstool  of  his  feet  (x.  12, 13). 
One  has  to  give  a  new  meaning  to  the  whole  Old  Tes- 
tament system  in   order  to  find    any  other   doctrine   in 


THE   EEDEMPTIVE    WORK    OF    CHRIST  379 

this  wonderful  epistle  than  that  of  a  vicarious  atone- 
ment. 

The  passages  in  the  epistles  of  Peter  emphasize  the 
same  aspects  of  truth,  so  f  ullj  brought  out  in  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  and  the  writings  of  Paul.  The  two  ideas 
of  redemption  and  sacrifice  are  continually  in  this  apos- 
tle's mind  (1  Pet.  i.  18, 19).  He  describes  the  Saviour's 
death  in  language  that  is  an  echo  of  the  fifty-third  chapter 
of  Isaiah :  "  Who  his  own  self  bear  our  sins  in  his  body 
upon  the  tree,  that  we,  having  died  unto  sins,  might  live 
unto  righteousness  ;  by  whose  stripes  ye  were  healed  " 
(1  Pet.  ii.  24).  And  in  words  which  remind  us  of  the 
fifth  chapter  of  Second  Corinthians,  he  tells  ns  how 
"  Christ  also  suffered  for  sins  once,  the  just  for  the  un- 
just, that  he  might  bring  us  to  God"  (1  Pet.  iii.  18). 

It  remains  only  to  speak  of  the  Apostle  John.  The 
truth  which  he  i-ecords  in  the  utterances  of  onr  Saviour, 
as  given  in  his  Gospel,  is  amply  confirmed  by  his  own 
declarations  in  his  other  writings.  In  the  First  Epistle  he 
teaches  that  "  the  blood  of  Jesus  his  (God's)  Son  cleanseth 
us  from  all  sin  "  (i.  7).  He  tells  ns  that  Christ  is  "  the 
propitiation  for  our  sins,  and  not  for  onrs  only,  but  also 
for  the  whole  world  "  (ii.  2).  "  He  laid  down  his  life  for 
ns  "  (iii.  16).  "  Herein  is  love,  not  that  we  loved  God, 
but  that  He  loved  us,  and  sent  his  Son  to  be  the  propitia- 
tion for  our  sins  "  (iv.  10).  JSTotice  how  the  atonement  or 
propitiatory  sacrifice  is  represented  as  originating  in  the 
love  of  God.  In  the  Apocalypse  Christ  is  represented  as 
he  "  that  loveth  us,  and  loosed  us  from  our  sins  by  his 
blood  "  (Pev.  i.  6).  He  is  "  a  Lamb  as  though  it  had  been 
slain  "  (v.  6),  and  this  is  his  common  designation  through- 
out the  book,  giving  prominence  to  the  atonement  even  in 
the  heavenly  state.  The  Lamb  is  the  light  and  the  glory 
of  the  Kew  Jerusalem. 

I  have  not  as  yet  entered  into  any  of  those  problems 
which  have  made  the  doctrine  of  the  atonement  a  theo- 


380  PRESENT   DAY    TIIEOLOCiY 

logical  battle-field.  ]]iit  I  think  that  enough  has  been 
said  to  show  that  the  Bible  contains  a  distinct  and  un- 
equivocal truth  to  teach  on  the  subject.  It  does  not  tell 
us  in  what  the  inmost  essence  of  the  atonement  consists. 
It  gives  us  but  imperfect  glimpses  into  the  heart  of  the 
mystery.  But  it  does  give  us  a  doctrine,  and  that,  one 
capable  of  being  stated  in  simple  and  definite  language. 
It  is  the  doctrine  of  a  vicarious  atonement — that  is,  that 
Jesus  Christ  has  rendered  to  God  the  amends  for  our  sins 
which  we  cannot  render  ourselves,  and  yet  which  is  due 
from  us,  and  that  thus  he  has  rendered  it  consistent  with 
God's  holiness  to  grant  us  forgiveness  and  restore  us  to 
His  favor.  I  said  that  Christ  has  done  this  for  us. 
Rather  let  me  say  that  God  Himself  has  done  it  for  us, 
through  Christ.  In  this  great  and  sacred  truth  the  uni- 
versal church  is  one. 


XXI. 

THE    REDEMPTIVE   WORK    OP    CHRIST 

(2.    The  Work  of  Atonement) 

AVhatevek  view  may  be  taken  of  the  Emperor  Con- 
stantiue's  vision  of  the  flaming  cross — whether  it  was  a 
real  experience,  or,  as  one  of  the  most  recent  ecclesiastical 
historians  suggests,  an  "  optical  illusion,"  or,  to  be  ex- 
plained as  a  legend  of  later  growth — it  points  to  a  great 
truth.  The  cross  symbolizes  what  is  most  essential  and 
sacred  in  Christianity.  It  was  not  without  reason  that 
the  Ictbarum  was  carried  as  the  standard  of  the  first  Chris- 
tian armies,  and  that  the  Crusaders  wore  the  sign  of  the 
cross  on  shoulder  or  breast.  It  has  not  been  without 
reason  that  the  church  in  all  ages  has  made  the  cross  its 
emblem.  To-day,  as  in  the  days  of  Constantine,  we  con- 
quer by  this  sign.  But  in  taking  the  cross  as  its  symbol, 
the  Christian  church  has  given  to  the  doctrine  of  the 
atonement  a  central  and  unique  place  among  the  truths 
which  it  teaches.  B}^  this  doctrine,  as  by  no  other,  it 
stands  or  falls.  I  say  this  with  no  thought  of  detriment 
to  the  immemorial  Protestant  claim  that  the  doctrine  of 
justification  by  faith  is  the  artioulus  stantis  et  cadentis 
ecclesice.f  the  fundamental  article  of  Christian  faith,  for 
this  doctrine  is  rooted  in  the  atonement  and  receives  all 
its  significance  from  it.  We  cannot,  without  surrendering 
what  is  most  essential  in  Christianity,  treat  the  truth  of 
Christ's  atonement  lightly  or  regard  it  as  of  secondar}^ 
importance.  It  is  our  duty  to  uphold  it  in  its  integrity 
and  to  seek  to  penetrate,  as  far  as  may  be,  into  its  deepest 


382  PRESENT   DAY    THEOLOGY 

meaning,  and  at  the  same  time  to  give  our  bebi  efforts 
to  commend  it  as  reasonable  to  the  acceptance  of  those 
Christians  who  are  hindered  by  intellectual  or  practical 
difficulties  from  accepting  it,  as  well  as  to  defend  it 
against  the  attacks  of  the  opponents  of  Christianity. 

I.  I  wish  to  speak  first  of  the  history  of  the  doctrine, 
and  hope  to  be  able  so  to  present  the  facts,  even  in  this 
brief  survey,  as  to  show  that,  in  spite  of  differences  re- 
specting the  theological  explanation  of  the  doctrine,  and 
of  some  temporary  aberrations  from  the  scriptural  teach- 
ings, the  church  in  all  ages  has  held  the  essence  and  core 
of  this  great  truth. 

In  the  earlier  centuries  of  the  church's  history  atten- 
tion was  concentrated  upon  problems  very  different  from 
that  of  the  atonement.  The  person  of  Christ,  the  Trinity, 
sin  and  grace,  and  the  nature  of  the  church  and  the 
sacraments,  were  the  subjects  about  which  the  primitive 
controversies  were  waged.  The  central  importance  of  the 
Saviour's  redemptive  work  was  everywhere  recognized, 
and  the  absolute  necessity  of  his  death  in  order  to  human 
salvation  universally  taught.  Just  as  to-day  the  ordinary 
Christian,  uninstructed  in  systematic  theology  yet  mighty 
in  the  Scriptures,  declares  with  a  true  and  vigorous  grasp 
on  the  essential  truth  of  the  atonement,  that  his 

"  Hope  is  built  on  nothing  less 
Thau  Jesus'  blood  autl  righteousness ; " 

so  it  was  with  the  early  church,  which  with  profound 
conviction  and  unvarying  constancy  affirmed,  chielly  in 
scriptural  language,  that  the  Saviour's  death  upon  the 
cross  was  the  vicarious  sacrifice  for  human  sin,  without  an 
interest  in  which  no  man  could  enter  the  kingdom  of  God. 
In  connection  with  this  simple  unscientific  faith  there  are 
anticipations,  consisting  rather  in  hints  than  in  systematic 
doctrinal  statements,  of  almost  all  the  great  theories  of  the 
atonement  which  have  attracted  attention  in  later  times. 


THE    REDEMPTIVE   WORK    OF    CHRIST  383 

The  first  theory  of  the  atonement  which  deserves  to 
bear  the  name  is  that  which  represents  Christ's  death  as 
God's  ransom  paid  to  Satan  for  the  deliverance  of  the 
sonls  of  men.  This  singnlar  view,  wliich  was  '  first  ad- 
vanced by  the  two  great  Fathers  of  the  Church,  Origen 
(died  254  a.d.)  and  Gregory  of  Nyssa  (died  about  400  a.d.), 
and  which  was  very  generally  held  in  the  church  from  the 
fifth  century  to  the  twelfth,  was  based  upon  the  assump- 
tion that  men,  in  consequence  of  sin,  have  fallen  into  the 
rightful  power  of  Satan.  God,  who  is  righteous,  must 
respect  the  rights  even  of  Satan.  In  order,  therefore, 
that  justice  may  be  maintained,  and  yet  the  lost  race  deliv- 
ered, God  sent  His  Son  into  the  world  and  offered  Satan, 
in  the  person  of  the  God-man,  endowed  with  miraculous 
powder,  a  prize  more  valuable  than  the  whole  race.  Satan, 
accepted  Christ  in  exchange  for  mankind,  and  the  transfer 
was  made  in  the  Saviour's  death.  The  race  was  delivered, 
and  Satan  found  in  Christ  a  servant  who  straightway 
became  his  Master,  overthrowing  his  power,  and  in  the 
resurrection  and  ascension  triumphing  gloriously.  The 
grotesqueness  of  this  singular  view  lies  upon  the  surface ; 
but  there  is  a  clear  recognition  in  it  of  the  vicarious  char- 
acter of  Christ's  work,  its  relation  to  the  divine  love  and 
justice,  and  its  absolute  necessity.  The  vessel  was  alto- 
gether an  earthen  one,  sure  sooner  or  later  to  be  broken, 
but  it  did  contain  and  preserve  the  golden  truth. 

A  far  higher  key  was  struck  by  the  great  Archbishop  of 
Canterbur}^  Anselm,  in  the  eleventh  century  (a.d.  1033- 
A.D.  1109).  According  to  his  "  satisfaction  theory  "  God 
is  bound  to  maintain  his  honor  in  the  face  of  human  sin, 
and  can  do  so  only  by  punishing  the  sinner  or  else  receiv- 
ing from  him  an  adequate  atonement  or  "  satisfaction  " — 
which  latter  was  viewed,  in  accordance  with  the  legal 
principles  of  the  time,  under  the  conception  of  a  money 
payment.  Sinful  men  cannot  themselves  make  satis- 
faction, for  sin  involves  infinite  guilt,  since  it  is  connnitted 


384  PRESENT   DAY    THEOLOGY 

against  an  infinite  Being.  In  this  extremity  of  man  God 
finds  His  opportunity.  Tlie  divine  Son  becomes  incarnate. 
Car  Deus  Homo  ?  is  the  question  wliicli  forms  the  title  of 
Ansehn's  treatise,  Why  did  God  become  man  ?  The 
atonement  is  the  answer  :  only  God  could  make  a  sufficient 
atonement,  yet  it  could  be  a  human  satisfaction  only  if 
made  by  a  man.  The  essence  of  the  atonement,  according 
to  Anselm,  consists  in  the  Saviour's  voluntary  obedience 
to  God  in  submitting  to  the  death  of  the  cross.  As  a  sin- 
less man  he  did  not  need  to  die.  So  his  death  upon  the 
cross  was  a  work  of  supererogation,  to  which  his  own  di- 
vine nature  gave  an  infinite  value,  and  which  received 
from  God  an  infinite  reward.  He  did  not  need  this  re- 
ward for  himself,  since  as  divine  he  had  no  wants,  lie 
therefore  passed  it  over  to  the  account  of  his  human 
brethren,  and  God  accepted  it  as  the  full  satisfaction  for 
their  sin.  It  is  impossible  not  to  admire  the  ethical  and 
spiritual  greatness  of  this  theory.  In  some  of  its  subor- 
dinate details  it  shows  the  theological  limitations  of  the 
time,  and  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  in  which  it  orig- 
inated ;  but  in  all  its  great  outlines  it  has  maintained  it- 
self, and  will  continue  to  do  so,  as  expressing  the  deepest 
thought  of  the  Christian  church  respecting  the  Saviour's 
atoning  work. 

The  Reformation  brought  still  another  theory,  which  is 
often,  but  quite  erroneously,  identified  with  the  Anselmic. 
It  is  what  is  often  called  the  theory  of  "penal  substitu- 
tion." Anselm  represented  God  as  standing  between  the 
two  alternatives,  punishment  or  satisfaction.  The  Ilefor- 
mation  theory  insists  on  punishment  in  any  case,  on  satis- 
faction through  punishment.  The  onlj^  alternatives  which 
it  admits  are,  the  punishment  of  the  sinner,  or  the  pun- 
ishment of  a  substitute.  God  chooses  the  latter  alterna- 
tive and  sends  His  Son  into  the  world  that  he  maj^  become 
the  sinner's  substitute  in  punishment.  The  God-man  takes 
the  sinner's  place,  obeys  for  liim  tlie  broken  law  of  God, 


THE    REDEMPTIVE    WORK    OF    CHRIST  385 

and  suffers  for  liiiu  the  piinishinent  of  death.  According 
to  the  strict  Calvinistic  view,  he  does  not  do  this  for  all 
men,  but  only  for  the  elect.  Those  who  hold  the  theory 
of  penal  substitution  agree  with  Anselni  in  teaching  that 
the  divine  nature  of  Christ  gave  to  his  death  an  infinite 
value.  The  Reformers  themselves  taught  that  Christ 
suffered  not  only  the  punishment  of  physical  death,  but 
also  that  of  hell.  Calvin  says,  "  It  was  necessary  for  him 
to  contend  with  the  powers  of  hell  and  the  horror  of 
eternal  death.  .  .  .  He  suffered  in  his  soul  the  dread- 
ful torments  of  a  person  condemned  and  irretrievably 
lost"  (Calvin's  "Institutes,"  Bk.  IL,  ch.  xvi ;  sect.  10,  11). 
Later  advocates  of  the  theory  have  contented  themselves 
with  teachino;  that  the  divine  nature  of  Christ  o;ave  to  his 
physical  sufferings  and  death  a  value  sufficient  to  counter- 
balance both  the  temporal  and  eternal  sufferings  to  which 
the  elect  are  justly  condemned.  The  Saviour  bears  the 
punishment,  and  the  sinner  who  accepts  his  work  by 
faith  goes  free,  while  in  virtue  of  Christ's  vicarious  obe- 
dience to  the  divine  law,  God  justifies  him  or  treats  him 
as  righteous.  No  one  who  realizes  how  much  good  has 
been  accomplished  in  the  world  by  means  of  this  theory, 
and  how  deeply  interwoven  it  is  with  the  most  sacred  as- 
pirations and  experiences  of  multitudes  of  Christian  be- 
lievers, will  speak  of  it  in  any  other  tone  than  that  of  re- 
spect. It  conveys  the  great  essential  truth  of  a  vicarious 
atonement,  and  makes  the  sinner  absolutely  dependent 
upon  Christ  for  his  salvation.  Yet  it  may  be  doubted 
whether  it  is  not  a  retrogression  from  the  Anselmic  view 
rather  than  an  advance  upon  it.  We  may  question 
whether  the  Scriptures  require  us  to  hold  that  the  Father 
punished  the  Son,  in  any  strict  sense  of  the  word  punish- 
ment. And  yet  I  gladly  admit  that  this  theory  includes 
the  essentials  of  the  doctrine. 

The  attacks  of  the  Socinians  upon  the  theory  of  penal 
substitution  led  to  several  interesting  attempts  to  modify 
35 


386  TRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

it.  The  Arminians  regarded  Christ's  death  rather  as  a 
vicarious  sacrifice  than  as  a  substituted  punishment.  They 
did  not  claim  that  its  intrinsic  value  was  such  as  to  make 
it  a  sufficient  atonement  for  human  sin.  Rather  they 
taught  that  it  derived  its  value  from  the  divine  acceptance 
of  it.  God,  who  was  graciously  pleased  to  accept  the  sac- 
rifices of  the  Old  Testament,  as  sufficient,  has  done  the 
same  in  the  case  of  the  far  more  valuable,  yet  still  intrin- 
sically inadequate  sacrifice  of  Christ.  As  was  to  be  ex- 
pected, this  Arminian  theory,  while  capable  of  being  so 
stated  as  to  include  all  the  essential  features  of  the  script- 
ural doctrine,  tended  to  reduce  the  atonement  to  a  matter 
of  only  relative  necessity  ;  for  if  the  value  of  the  Savioui'^s 
death  was  due  to  the  divine  acceptance  of  it,  the  question 
was  readily  raised,  Why  might  not  God  do  witliout  it  alto- 
gether, and  accept  the  reformation  of  the  sinner  as  a  suf- 
ficient atonement  ?  Accordingly,  this  theory  gave  place 
in  many  quarters  to  the  moral  influence  view,  of  which 
mention  is  pi-esently  to  be  made. 

One  of  the  most  interesting,  and  on  the  whole  influen- 
tial, of  the  modern  attempts  to  explain  the  doctrine  of  the 
atonement,  is  the  so-called  "  governmental  theory."  This 
was  first  advanced  by  the  Dutch  jurist,  Grotius,  in  the 
first  half  of  the  seventeenth  centurj'.  It  reappeared  un- 
der a  somewhat  modified  form,  and  wholly  independently 
of  the  Grotian  theology,  in  connection  with  that  remark- 
able theological  movement,  beginning  near  the  middle  of 
the  last  century,  and  reaching  in  its  fruitful  results  down 
to  the  present  time,  which  we  call  the  ISTew  England  the- 
ology. This  theory  rests  upon  the  distinction  between 
God's  distributive  justice,  which  is  concerned  with  the 
divine  rewards  and  punishments  in  their  relation  to  per- 
sonal character  and  desert,  and  His  general  or  rectoral 
justice,  which  is  synonymous  with  the  holiness  or  love  of 
God,  and  which  is  concerned  with  God's  government  as 
intended   to   secure   the  best  good  of  all  intelligent   be- 


THE   REDEMPTIVE   AVOKK    OF    CHRIST  387 

iugs.  Distributive  justice  denuiuds  the  punishment  of  the 
sinner;  but  distributive  justice  is  subordinate  to  general 
justice  and  may  be  passed  over  in  the  interests  of  the 
latter.  JS^ow  the  sufferings  and  death  of  Christ  were  a 
divine  provision  for  the  satisfaction  of  God's  general  jus- 
tice, inasmuch  as  they  manifested  God's  hatred  of  sin  and 
showed  Ilis  earnestness  in  tlireatening  it  with  punish- 
ment. They  rendered  it  consistent  with  the  interests  of 
God's  government  to  pass  over  the  claims  of  distributive 
justice  and  to  pardon  the  sinner  According  to  this  view 
Christ  did  not  bear  the  sinner's  punishment,  but  a  sub- 
stitute for  that  punishment ;  his  sufferings  and  death  an- 
swered the  same  ends  as  would  have  been  answered  by 
the  sinner's  punishment.  Distributive  justice,  indeed, 
always  continues  to  demand  the  sinner's  punishment  ; 
but  general  justice  determines  the  divine  attitude  toward 
the  sinner.  This  theory  was  the  result  of  a  reaction 
against  the  doctrine  of  penal  substitution  and  labors  un- 
der certain  defects  which  were  scarcely  to  be  avoided 
under  the  circumstances.  It  emphasizes  the  man  ward 
side  of  the  atonement  so  strongly  as  to  make  it  easy  to 
forget  the  Godward  asj^ect.  But,  rightly  understood,  it 
includes  and  does  justice  to  both  sides,  and  conserves  the 
essential  truth  of  the  scriptural  doctrine. 

I  have  referred  to  the  "  moral  influence  "  theory.  This 
made  its  appearance  in  the  Middle  Ages,  when  it  was  ad- 
vanced by  the  great,  but  erratic,  theologian  and  philos- 
opher, Abelard.  It  has  made  its  appearance  many  times 
during  the  later  history  of  the  church,  always  as  a  re- 
action from  the  more  extreme  and  rigorous  aspects  of 
the  orthodox  doctrine.  It  is  simply  stated,  and  from  its 
freedom  from  the  ethical  difficulties  which  hinder  many 
miiids  from  fully  accepting  the  common  doctrine,  has 
found  wide  acceptance.  This  view  denies  that  the  death 
of  Christ  is  an  atonement  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  word, 
that   is,  a   necessary    condition    and   prerequisite   to  the 


388  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

removal  of  the  hindrances  in  the  divine  lioliness  to  the 
foraiveuess  of  sin.  It  views  the  death  of  Christ  rather 
under  the  category  of  revelation  than  of  atonement,  as  a 
part  of  his  prophetical  rather  than  of  his  priestly  office. 
It  is  the  great  manifestation  of  the  divine  love,  the  pledge 
to  men  of  God's  eternal  readiness  to  forgive  the  return- 
ing sinner.  The  divine  justice  needs  no  other  satisfaction 
than  the  repentance  and  reformation  of  the  sinner.  This 
theory  was  presented  with  great  power  and  beauty  by 
Horace  Boshnell  in  his  "Vicai'ious  Sacrifice ;"  but  lie 
found  it  insufficient,  and  afterward  supplemented  it  by 
a  view  which  finds  in  God's  self-sacrifice,  or  "  making 
cost ''  for  sinners,  an  atonement  in  some  true  sense  of  the 
word  made  by  God  to  Himself — ^a  theory  which  once 
worked  out  with  due  regard  to  Christ's  human  nature 
and  his  representative  relation  to  mankind,  would  in- 
evitably approximate  to  the  Catholic  doctrine.  The 
moral  influence  theory  exhibits  au  unquestioned  truth 
which  has  been  too  much  neglected  by  the  otlier  forms  of 
doctrine,  namely,  the  manifestation  of  the  divine  love  in 
the  atonement.  But  it  does  not  give  us  the  atonement 
itself  in  any  real  meaning  of  the  word.  It  fails  to  give 
us  any  satisfactory  explanation  of  the  twenty-fifth  and 
twenty-sixth  verses  of  the  third  chapter  of  Romans. 

I  can  do  no  more  than  allude  to  the  most  suggestive 
and  deeply  spiritual  work  on  the  subject  of  the  atonement 
wliicli  has  appeared  in  recent  times,  that  of  Dr.  J.  Mac- 
leod  Campbell,  in  which  he  explains  the  atonement  as  a 
vicarious  repentance  and  confession  of  sin — a  view  which 
will  not  stand  the  test  of  careful  theological  analysis,  but 
which  gives  helpful  hints  in  the  direction  of  a  clearer  rec- 
ognition of  the  spiritual  and  ethical  elements  in  the 
atonement.  I  must  also  content  myself  with  the  bare 
mention  of  the-  theories  which  identify  the  atonement 
with  the  reconciliation  or  the  at-one-ment,  according  to 
the  etymology  of  the  word,  between  man  and  God,  first 


THE   REDEMPTIVE   WORK    OF   OITRTST  389 

in  the  holy  life  of  Jesus,  by  which  the  kingdom  of  God 
is  restored  in  his  person,  and  then  in  the  restoration  of 
sinners  tlirough  the  power  of  the  risen  Lord  working 
through  liis  Spirit. 

II.  Modern  tlieology  has  begun  to  learn  the  true  lesson 
which  the  history  of  doctrine  has  to  teach  us,  namely, 
that  in  all  the  earnest  efforts  which  the  church  has  made 
to  come  to  an  understanding  of  the  great  truths  which 
revelation  has  bestowed  upon  it,  there  has  been  something 
of  good,  something  worthy  of  recognition  and  preserva- 
tion. What  we  need  most  of  all  to  do  is  to  subject  the 
various  theories  to  a  careful  and  appreciative  criticism,  to 
prove  all  things  and  to  hold  fast  that  which  is  good.  The 
remark  we  hear  so  often  made,  that  we  need  all  the 
theories  of  the  atonement,  is  indicative  of  this  wholesome 
tendency.  A  doctrine  so  large  and  many-sided,  that 
reaches  so  deeply  into  the  central  mysteries  of  the  Chris- 
tian system,  cannot  be  adequately  expressed  in  any  one 
form  of  words. 

It  is  in  this  spirit  that  I  desire  to  attempt  a  doctrinal 
statement,  which  shall  in  some  measure  bring  together 
the  elements  of  the  great  truth  which  we  have  been  con- 
sidering, as  we  find  them  in  the  Scriptures  and  in  the 
speculations  of  Christian  thinkers.  I  have  no  theory  to 
give.  Enough  if  I  can  give  a  far-off  glimpse  of  that 
building  of  God,  that  sacred  truth  itself,  which  all  the 
theories  only  reveal  in  part. 

The  atonement  originated  in  the  love  of  God.  He 
meant  to  establish  His  kingdom  in  the  sinful  world.  But 
sin  stood  in  the  way  of  this  end  of  His  plan  and  works. 
The  establishment  of  the  kingdom  is  impossible  without 
the  restoration  of  sinners.  The  first  step  toward  com- 
plete salvation  is  forgiveness.  The  door  to  the  kingdom 
is  reconciliation.  But  God  is  not  merely  love  ;  He  is  holy 
love.  Love  is  not  weak,  careless  good-nature  ;  there  is  in 
it   a   principle   of  self-preservation  and   self-assertion,    a 


390  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

righteousness  whicii  guards  it  from  all  that  would  lower 
its  dignity  and  sacredness.  God  cannot,  with  due  regard 
to  Ris  own  holiness,  pardon  the  sinner  out  of  hand ; 
atonement  must  be  made  for  his  sin.  And  jet  the  sinner 
cannot  make  atonement  for  himself.  He  is  not  only 
guilty  but  helpless.  He  cannot  take  the  first  step  toward 
righting  the  w^-ong  he  has  done  to  God.  He  lias  nothing 
to  offer  to  God  as  an  atonement. 

"  Not  the  labor  of  my  hands 
Can  fulfil  thy  law's  demands ; 
Conld  my  zeal  no  respite  know, 
Could  my  tears  forever  flow, 
All  for  sin  could  not  atone." 

Therefore  God  sent  His  only-begotten  Son  into  the 
world,  sent  him  in  His  love  and  holiness.  Jesus  Christ 
was  perfectly  qualified  for  the  work  of  atonement.  He 
was  the  God-man.  It  was  to  be  a  divine  atonement.  God 
was  to  render  the  atonement  to  Himself  for  man  ;  it  was 
to  be  a  divine  provision,  a  gift  of  divine  grace,  something 
wholly  gratuitous,  in  which  men  had  no  share  at  all. 
Nevertheless,  it  was  to  be  a  human  atonement,  rendered 
by  humanity  to  God  ;  in  other  words,  it  was  to  be  a  real 
atonement  and  not  the  mere  show  of  one.  God  became 
man  that  He  might  make  atonement  for  man  ;  He  i)ecame 
the  central  and  universal  Man,  Because  men  were  all 
sinners,  and  so  unfit  to  render  atonement,  He  made  a  new 
manhood,  in  and  through  which  He  might  become  recon- 
ciled to  mankind,  and  whicli  should  be  the  beginning  and 
rallying-point  of  a  redeemed  manhood. 

Christ  prepared  himself  for  the  atoning  work  by  his 
human  experience.  From  the  first  his  relation  to  the  race 
was  vicarious.  As  we  have  seen,  an  atoning  element  runs 
alongside  of  the  Saviour's  work  of  i-evelation.  He  entered 
personally  into  our  human  life,  taking  upon  him  its  jojs 
and  its  sorrows,  its  prosperity  and  its  adversity.     He  en- 


THE    REDEMPTIVE    -WORK    OF   CHRIST  391 

dured  temptation,  trial,  and  hardship.  lie  took  upon  his 
sympathy  and  •  love  the  woes  of  his  human  brethren. 
With  that  power  of  putting  one's  self  into  another's  place 
which  love  alone  gives,  he  made  human  sufferings  his 
own,  and,  though  sinless,  learned  the  deepest  meaning  of 
sin,  Xo  man  ever  knew  sin  as  Jesus  Christ  knew  it. 
The  sinner's  eyes  are  always  blurred  when  he  looks  at  his 
own  sin  or  that  of  his  neighbor.  But  Christ  understood 
it  in  all  its  evil,  and  understood  its  relation  to  God's  holi- 
ness. As  God  he  knew  the  divine  displeasure  which  con- 
tinually rests  upon  sin ;  he  knew  it  standing  thus  over  it 
and  looking  down  upon  it.  As  man,  and  that  a  holy  man 
sharing  the  experience  of  his  sinful  brethren,  he  felt  the 
divine  displeasure  coming  down  to  him  from  above,  and 
looked  up  to  it  with  a  sense  of  its  righteousness  and  avvful- 
ness.  In  his  union  with  sinners  it  was  as  if  God's  dis- 
pleasure rested  upon  him  also.  Nay  more,  in  so  far  as  he 
shared  in  those  corporate  evils  which  are  a  divine  punish- 
ment of  sin,  a  kind  of  objectivized  divine  displeasure,  he 
felt  himself  under  punishment. 

Thus  Christ  was  fitted  to  be  our  substitute  in  atonement, 
and  to  render  that  atonement  which  we  ought  to  render, 
but  cannot.  We  have  noticed  that  there  was  an  atoning 
element  in  the  Saviour's  whole  life.  But  the  atoning  act 
by  way  of  eminence  was  his  death  upon  the  cross.  His 
death,  his  blood,  his  cross,  his  giving  of  his  life — such  are  the 
terms  by  which  the  Scriptures  describe  the  atoning  deed. 

What  gave  Christ's  death  its  efficacy  as  an  atonement  ? 
The  attempt  to  answer  this  question  will  carry  us  out  of 
the  sphere  of  distinctly  revealed  truth  into  that  of  human 
speculation,  and  we  shall  do  well  to  carefully  distinguish 
between  the  two  and  to  recognize  the  necessary  limitations 
of  the  latter.  There  is  truth  in  Bishop  Butler's  words : 
"  If  the  Scripture  has,  as  surely  it  has,  left  this  matter  of 
the  satisfaction  of  Christ  mysterious,  left  somewhat  in  it 
unrevealed,  all  conjectures  about  it  must  be,  if  not  evident- 


392  niESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

]y  absurd,  yet  at  least  uncertain.  Nor  has  any  one  reason 
to  complain  for  want  of  further  information,  unless  he 
can  show  his  claim  to  it  "  ("  Analogy,"  Pt.  II.,  ch.  v.). 
Kevertheless,  Butler's  caution  may  go  too  far.  "  Uncer- 
tain'' all  conjectures  must  undoubtedly  be,  but  not  neces- 
sarily "  palpably  absurd."  It  is  oui'  right,  if  we  choose,  to 
take  a  purely  agnostic  position  with  reference  to  the  inner 
and  essential  principle  of  the  atonement,  and  to  say  with 
Coleridge,  "  The  mysterious  act,  the  operative  cause,  is 
transcendent.  Factum  est :  and  beyond  the  information 
contained  in  the  enunciation  of  the  fact,  it  can  be  charac- 
terized only  by  the  consequences  "  ("  Aids  to  Reflection," 
Am.  ed.,  1S40,  p.  287).  But  it  is  equally  our  right,  while 
admitting  the  transcendent  element  in  the  problem,  to 
reverently  attempt  such  a  sohition  of  it  as  our  reason, 
guided  and  enlightened  by  God's  Spirit,  will  permit  us  to 
attain.  In  the  exercise  of  this  right,  yet  with  the  distinct 
recognition  of  the  fact  that  "  we  know  in  part  and  proph- 
esy in  part,"  I  would  give  a  twofold  answer  to  the  ques- 
tion. What  gave  the  Saviour's  death  its  value  as  an  atone- 
ment ?  It  is  the  answer  which,  as  I  believe,  results  from 
a  thorough  criticism  of  the  various  theories  which  have 
been  held  during  the  history  of  the  church. 

The  first  bi-anch  of  the  answer  concerns  the  relation  of 
death  to  human  sin.  Death  entered  the  world  as  the 
punishment  of  Adam's  transgression.  It  has  been  the 
punishment  visited  upon  all  sinners  since  his  time ;  it 
passed  unto  all  men  because  all  sinned  (Rom.  v.  12). 
Through  the  relation  in  which  they  stand  to  a  fallen  race, 
even  infants,  who  hav^e  never  sinned  personally',  die. 
Death  may  be  called  in  a  time  sense,  in  virtue  of  the  sol- 
idarity of  the  race,  the  common  doom  which  rests  upon 
mankind.  It  is  the  outward  and  visible  manifestation  of 
the  divine  disjileasure.  It  is  directly  connected  with  that 
false  relation  to  God  which  we  call  spii'itual  death,  and  it 
is  the  entrance  for  the  unfoi"i2;iven  sinner  into  that  final 


THE   REDEMPTIVE    WORK    OF    CHRIST  393 

state  in  which  spiritual  death  works  out  its  conseqnences 
and  is  visited  by  the  divine  pimishment,  and  to  which  we 
give  the  name  eternal  death.  The  Saviour  as  a  sinless 
man  needed  not  to  die,  yet  of  his  own  free  will  he  gave 
himself  np  to  death,  as  the  i-epresentative  and  substitute 
of  the  sinful  race.  He  put  himself,  as  far  as  was  possible 
for  the  sinless  One,  into  the  sinner's  place,  where  he 
could  realize  the  greatness  of  human  sin  and  of  the  divine 
displeasure  which  visits  sin  with  punishment.  Pie  tasted 
death  for  every  man  (Heb.  ii.  9). 

The  second  branch  of  the  answer  relates  to  the  inner 
meaning  of  the  Saviour's  death.  Death  has  no  atoning 
value  in  itself.  The  dignity  and  infinite  worth  of  the 
Saviour's  divine  nature  did  not  of  themselves  make  his 
death  a  sufficient  atonement.  As  atonement  in  the  case 
of  men,  when  they  make  it  to  each  other,  is  always  in  its 
essence  moral  and  spiritual,  in  whatever  outward  and  sig- 
nificant act  it  may  express  itself,  so  in  the  case  of  the 
Saviour.  It  was  the  spirit  and  purpose  with  which  he 
suffered  that  gave  his  death  its  efficacy.  As  the  Son  of 
Man,  the  Second  Adam,  he  rendered  to  God  that  spiiltual 
reparation  or  atonement  which  sinful  men  ought  to  ren- 
der but  cannot.  We  may  not  be  able  to  understand  alto- 
gether in  what  this  reparation  consisted,  but  we  are  not 
without  glimpses  of  it.  The  Saviour  laid  his  will  a  holy 
offering  on  the  divine  altar.  Acting  in  behalf  of  mankind, 
with  perfect  obedience  and  love,  and  absolute  self-surren- 
der, he  acknowledged  tlie  divine  justice  in  the  punish- 
ment of  sin  and  sought  the  divine  forgiveness.  It  was 
not  a  vicarious  repentance,  but  a  vicarious  atonement. 
Repentance  is  personal  and  cannot  be  performed  by  an- 
other ;  like  faith,  with  which  it  is  inseparably  connected, 
it  must  be  a  man's  own  act.  Atonement  belongs  not  only 
to  the  individual  life,  but  to  the  region  of  mankind's  cor- 
porate unity,  where  representation  and  substitution  are 
possible. 


394  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

Combining  the  two  branches  of  onr  answer,  we  may 
say  that  Christ's  atonement  consists  in  this  :  That  as  the 
Substitute  for  the  sinful  race,  the  God-man  endured  in 
obedience,  love,  and  acknowledgment  of  the  divine  jus- 
tice, the  death  which  is  the  common  doom,  and  by  so 
doing  rendered  to  God  the  spiritual  reparation  which  was 
due  from  man,  and  without  which  God  could  not  justly 
forgive  the  sinner. 

In  so  far  as  death  is  the  common  punishment  of  sin  we 
may  say  that  Christ  bore  our  punishment.  But  we  use 
the  language  thus  in  a  very  different  sense  from  that  in 
which  it  is  employed  by  the  advocates  of  the  theory  of 
penal  substitution.  Christ  did  not  bear  our  personal  and 
individual  punishment,  either  the  temporal  or  the  eternal 
punishment.  He  was  not  punished  himself.  He  took  upon 
him  that  consequence  of  sin  which  to  others  is  punish- 
ment. He  shared  the  common  punishment  voluntarily  and 
for  the  purpose  of  effecting  atonement  for  us,  as  the  child 
who  dies  in  infancy  shares  that  punishment  involuntarily. 
He  was  no  more  punished  personally  than  is  the  child. 
We  speak  of  his  vicarious  death,  but  the  vicariousness  lay 
i-ather  in  the  spiritual  sacrifice  to  God,  of  which  the  death 
was  the  vehicle  and  expression,  than  in  the  death  itself. 
He  was  not  our  Substitute  in  punishment,  but  our  Substi- 
tute in  atonement. 

in.  It  remains  for  me  to  speak  of  the  reasonableness 
of  the  doctrine  of  the  atonement.  Among  all  the  truths 
of  the  Christian  system  tliei-e  is  none  which  is  more  per- 
sistently assailed  than  this.  The  cross  of  Christ  is  as 
truly  to-day,  as  in  the  times  of  the  Apostles,  "  unto  Jews  a 
stumbling-block  and  unto  Gentiles  foolishness."  The  re- 
ligion that  seeks  salvation  in  good  woi'ks  and  the  phi- 
losophy that  denies  revelation  unite  in  opposition  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  atonement.  So  strong  and  clamorous  is  the 
opposition  that  many  minds  are  disturbed  and  confused  by 
it,  so  that  to-day  there  is  inside  the  churcli,  as  well  as 


THE   KEDEMPTIVE   WOKK   OF   CIIP.IRT  395 

outside  of  it,  a  great  deal  of  difficulty  about  the  acceptance 
of  this  truth. 

Now  there  are  real  reasons  for  the  state  of  things  which 
we  find.  In  the  first  place  there  is  a  transcendent  element, 
as  we  have  already  noticed,  in  the  doctrine.  Like  the 
doctrines  of  the  Trinity  and  the  person  of  Christ,  it  be- 
longs in  part  to  the  sphere  of  the  infinite.  In  part,  at 
least,  the  atonement  is  a  transaction  within  the  Deity  it- 
self. It  is  only  the  outward  manifestation  of  it  which  we 
have  been  permitted  to  see.  The  death  on  Calvary  is  a 
revelation  of  eternal  things.  Ko  wonder  that  those  who 
judge  merely  by  the  standard  of  finite  things  should  have 
difficulty  with  this  mysterious  dogma.  A  second  reason 
lies  in  the  distinctively  Christian  character  of  the  doc- 
trine. It  belongs  to  the  deepest  core  and  essence  of  the 
redemptive  system.  Now  this  system  was  given  because 
of  human  sin,  and  it  comes  into  direct  collision  w^ith  the 
teachings  of  reason,  so  far  as  reason  has  been  darkened  by 
sin.  There  is  something  repulsive  to  the  natural  man  in 
God's  grace,  and  most  of  all  in  this  wonderful  provision 
upon  which  God's  grace  is  based.  A  spiritual  susceptibil- 
ity must  be  present  before  there  can  be  a  full  and  hearty 
acceptance  of  the  doctrine  of  the  atonement.  The  awak- 
ened sinner,  in  despair  of  his  own  power,  feeling  his  guilt 
and  utter  helplessness,  finds  in  it  just  the  help  he  needs. 
The  Christian,  who  knows  that  he  has  been  justified  by 
faith  on  the  ground  of  the  Saviour's  atoning  sacrifice, 
would  almost  as  soon  think  of  doubting  his  own  existence 
as  the  reality  of  this  foundation  upon  which  all  his  pos- 
sessions and  all  his  hopes  are  based.  But  the  case  stands 
very  differently  with  him  who  has  had  no  such  experience. 
In  the  defence  of  the  doctrine  we  must  make  our  appeal 
in  part  to  the  "  Chiistian  consciousness."  A  third  reason 
for  the  hesitation  which  so  many  have  in  the  acceptance  of 
the  doctrine  lies  in  its  fundamental  character.  When  we 
attempt  to  explain  it  by  human  analogies,  or,  as  Horace 


896  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

Bnslinell  puts  it  in  the  title  of  bis  "  Vicai-iovis  Sacrifice,"* 
from  "principles  of  universal  obligation,"  we  find  tbat  tbe 
analogies  and  principles  derived  from  tbe  relations  of  men 
must  tbemselves  be  explained  by  tbe  atonement.  For  ex- 
ample, we  attempt  to  explain  tbe  atonement  by  sbowing 
what  is  needful  in  order  to  forgiveness,  wbere  a  buman 
fatber  and  son,  or  two  buman  friends,  bave  quarrelled. 
We  fail,  and  tbe  reason — wbicb  we  may  perceive  and  may 
not — lies  in  tbe  fact  tbat  tbe  buman  relation  is  tbe  result 
of  tbe  atonement.  It  is  true  tbat  I  am  to  forgive  my 
neighbor,  so  far  as  my  power  is  concerned,  without  an  ad- 
equate atonement.  But  why  ?  Because  Christ  has  rendered 
once  for  all  a  universal  atonement.  We  are  to  forgive  be- 
cause we  bave  been  forgiven.  The  insufficient  atonement 
which  my  neighbor  makes  to  me  becomes  sufficient,  and 
more  than  sufficient,  when  1  understand  what  Christ  has 
done  for  me  and  for  every  man. 

Kevertheless,  in  spite  of  these  especial  difficulties  in  tbe 
way  of  understanding  tbe  doctrine  of  tbe  atonement,  it  is 
a  reasonable  doctrine,  like  all  the  truths  of  tbe  Christian 
system.  Tbe  highest  proof  must  indeed  come  through  the 
personal  experience  of  the  soul  tbat  has  been  "  crucified 
with  Christ ;  "  but  a  sufficient  answer  can  be  given  both  to 
tbe  cavils  of  tbe  opponent  of  Christianity  and  to  tbe  honest 
questionings  of  tbe  Christian  inquirer.  Let  me  take  up 
some  of  the  more  common  objections  and  answer  them. 

1.  The  necessity  of  the  atonement  is  denied.  It  is  said 
that  God  is  love,  tbat  He  is  always  ready  to  forgive,  and 
tbat  we  dishonor  Ilim  when  we  represent  Ilim  as  demand- 
ing reparation.  This  objection  is  urged  with  more  force 
against  tbe  theory  of  penal  substitution  than  against  tbat 
wbicb  has  been  given  bei-e,  but  still  it  is  aimed  at  any 
theory  wbicb  finds  a  God  ward  aspect  in  tbe  atonement. 

In  reply,  while  admitting  tbat  God  is  love,  we  claim  tbat 
His  love  is  a  holy  love,  which  will  not  unrighteously  forgive 

*  First  edition. 


THE   REDEMPTIVE   WORK    OF   CHRIST  397 

tlie  sinner  without  adequate  amends.  God  must  be  true  to 
Himself  and  true  to  His  moral  universe.  He  cannot  deny 
Himself.     God  is  not  less  holy  than  men,  but  far  more  so. 

It  is  said  that  the  human  father  who  would  not  forgive 
his  child  when  he  came  to  him  in  penitence  would  be  a 
monster,  and  that  God  must  do  the  same  by  His  human 
children.  But  the  two  cases  are  not  parallel,  for,  as  has 
been  already  said,  the  reason  why  man  must  forgive  is 
because  God  has  already  forgiven  him,  and  man  can  do 
without  an  atonement  because  Christ  has  rendered  a  per- 
fect one.  Moreover,  the  sinner  does  not  come  to  God  in 
penitence  until  God  has  furnished  him  with  an  atonement, 
nor  is  there  any  reason  to  believe  that  he  ever  would  come 
without  the  aid  of  the  divine  grace.  But  though  insisting 
that  the  two  cases  are  not  parallel,  I  claim  that,  so  far  as 
an  analogy  does  exist  between  them,  it  favors  the  doctrine 
of  atonement.  The  earthly  father  cannot  forgive  his  child 
until  he  has  rendered  some  atonement,  even  though  it  may 
be  inadequate.  There  must  be  some  acknowledgment  of 
the  father's  just  displeasure,  some  confession  of  wrong, 
and  these  things  are  of  the  nature  of  an  atonement. 
Without  them  the  father's  forgiveness  would  be  inoper- 
ative. Reconciliation  implies  action  on  both  sides.  The 
father  could  not,  in  the  true  and  complete  meaning  of 
the  word  forgiveness,  forgive  an  obstinately  rebellious 
son.  I  claim  also  that  the  common  consciousness  of  man- 
kind, as  expressed  in  religious  beliefs  and  customs,  testi- 
fies to  the  sinner's  need  of  atonement.  Doubtless  there 
has  been  much  of  evil  associated  with  the  sacrifices  of  the 
heathen,  but  there  is  in  them  a  witness  to  the  great  truth 
which  the  aniraa  naturaliter  Christiana^  the  soul  by  nature 
Christian,  recognizes  instinctively,  that  without  atonement 
there  can  be  no  forgiveness.  Even  the  awful  custom  of 
human  sacrifice  gives  grim  testimony  to  this  profound 
moral  and  religious  principle. 

2.  It  is  denied  that  atonement  can  be  vicarious.     Every 


398  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

man,  it  is  said,  stands  or  falls  according  to  his  own  per- 
sonal relations  to  God.  Another  cannot  step  in  and  take 
his  place. 

But  we  assert  that  there  is  such  a  relation  between  man 
and  man  in  the  race  that  vicarious  action  is  possible. 
Tlie  individualistic  or  atomistic  view  of  men  is  not  sus- 
tained by  true  science  any  more  than  by  true  theology. 
The  solidarity  of  the  race  is  such  that  one  can  and  must 
act  for  another.  Parents  act  and  choose  for  their  chil- 
dren. The  stronger  members  of  society  take  upon  them- 
selves the  interests  of  the  weaker.  For  good  and  for  evil 
men  are  bound  up  together.  There  is  a  common  life  as 
well  as  an  individual  life.  Without  the  vicarious  relation 
tlie  great  institutions  of  mankind,  such  as  the  family,  the 
church,  the  state,  the  school,  business,  commerce,  would 
be  impossible.  When,  then,  we  consider  how  deeply 
I'ooted  this  vicarious  principle  is  in  the  race,  how  it  makes 
itself  felt  in  every  department  of  human  life  and  activity, 
especially  how  important  a  part  it  plays  in  the  moral  re- 
lations of  men,  is  it  strange  that  God  should  have  availed 
Himself  of  it  to  secure  the  redemption  of  mankind  ?  May 
we  not  even  suppose  that  He  constituted  the  race  thus,  in 
order  that  thus  He  might  redeem  it  ?  If  ordinary  men 
can  stand  for  each  other,  exercising  vicarious  powers  in 
each  other's  behalf,  how  much  more  can  the  Son  of  Man, 
the  Head  of  the  race,  who  stands  in  a  central  relation  to 
mankind  and  a  personal  relation  to  every  soul  of  man,  as- 
sume this  vicarious  relation  and  make  vicarious  atone- 
ment !  If  Adam  was  our  natural  head,  why  should  not 
Christ  be  our  spiritual  Head  ? 

3.  The  atoning  act  is  called  in  question.  It  is  said 
that  it  is  not  an  atonement.  The  amends  which  Christ 
makes  is  not  commensurate  with  the  sin  of  man.  What 
is  there  in  the  death  of  Christ  that  should  lead  God  to 
forgive  sin  ?  We  cannot  suppose  that  God  took  any 
pleasure  in  the  death  of  this  innocent  Being  or   received 


II 


THE   REDEMPTIVE   WORK   OF   CHRIST  390 

any  benefit  from  it.  The  full  force  of  this  objection  is 
directed  against  the  theory  of  penal  substitution,  and  em- 
phasizes the  fact  that  while  men  are  condemned  to  eter- 
nal punishment  Christ  suffers  only  physical  death. 

It  is  not  needful  for  me  to  defend  the  doctrine  of  sub- 
stitution in  punishment,  which  undoubtedly  has  its  defects. 
It  will  be  sufficient  to  answer  the  objection  so  far  as  it 
touches  the  more  general  point  of  atonement.  But  if  the 
view  which  has  been  advanced  be  true,  that  the  atonement 
consisted  not  mereW  in  the  outward  fact  of  Christ's  death, 
but  chiefly  in  the  spirit  and  purpose  with  which  he  en- 
dured death,  then  the  objection  loses  its  point.  For  all 
real  atonement  is  a  matter  of  the  will.  It  would  be  so  in 
the  case  of  the  sinner,  if  he  were  able  to  atone  for  his 
own  sin.  That  which  the  Saviour  gives  is  that  which  the 
sinner  ought  to  give  but  cannot.  The  two  are  altogether 
commensurate.  Moreover,  that  which  God  receives  is  that 
which  is  most  precious ;  it  is  the  holy  will  of  the  holy 
Son  of  Man,  appearing  for  the  race  and  presenting  the 
spiritual  atonement  of  the  race  to  Him.  The  death  is  the 
vesture,  so  to  speak,  of  the  atonement,  essential,  since  all 
the  natural  consequences  and  physical  punishments  of  sin 
are  concentrated  in  death,  but  valuable  only  as  it  covers 
and  contains  the  spiritual  reparation. 

4.  It  is  said  that  the  atonement  is  immoral,  since  it 
secures  forgiveness  for  those  who  are  unworthy  of  forgive- 
ness, and  lowers  the  standard  of  human  obligation.  We 
are  to  work  out  our  own  salvation  and  not  to  depend  upon 
the  merits  of  another.  The  doctrine  therefore  militates 
against  the  divine  righteousness  and  tends  to  degrade  the 
divine  law.  It  is  scarcely  needrul  to  say  that  this  objec- 
tion is  not  urged  by  those  who  claim  that  God  is  always 
readj^  to  forgive  without  an  atonement.  It  has  its  weight 
with  many  minds  which  would  not  be  affected  by  the 
arguments  of  the  latter  class.  It  seems  to  me  that  it  is 
worthier  of  respect  than  most  of  the  objections  brought 


400  PKESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

against  our  doctrine.  Nevertheless,  it  rests  upon  a  mis- 
apprehension. Atonement  is  only  a  part  of  a  great  re- 
demptive system,  the  object  of  which  is  the  complete 
salvation  of  the  sinner  and  the  perfect  establishment  of 
the  kingdom  of  God.  It  is  a  means  to  an  end  and  derives 
its  whole  importance  from  this  fact.  Men  are  forgiven 
that  they  may  be  fully  saved  and  only  when  all  the  ar- 
rangements have  been  made  by  which  this  full  salvation 
is  possible.  The  divine  forgiveness  is  merely  the  door  of 
entrance  to  the  kingdom,  and  once  in  the  kingdom  the 
moral  obligation  rests  on  a  man  with  eveu  stronger  press- 
ure than  before.  We  must  not  look  at  the  priestly  office 
of  Christ,  whereby  he  secures  forgiveness,  apart  from  the 
kingly,  whereby  he  sanctifies  and  saves  through  the  power 
of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Let  us  also  remember  that  the  atone- 
ment of  Christ  secures  pardon  only  for  those  who  exercise 
personal  faith,  and  that  this  faith,  if  it  be  genuine,  contains 
in  it  the  germ  of  love  and  holy  living.  The  sinner  is  not 
forgiven  and  left  where  he  is ;  rather  lie  is  foi-given,  and 
by  God's  grace,  appropriated  b\^  faith,  made  holy.  I  free- 
ly concede  that  if  this  were  not  the  case  the  atonement 
would  be  hard  to  reconcile  either  with  the  divine  right- 
eousness or  the  requirements  of  the  divine  law.  But  how 
are  God's  righteousness  and  law  most  honored,  by  leaving 
the  sinne.'  in  his  helplessness  and  ruin  ?  or  by  furnishing 
him  with  such  an  atonement  as  will  open  the  way  for  his 
complete  salvation? 

5.  An  objection,  which  to  some  minds  is  a  very  serious 
one,  is  derived  from  the  alleged  opposition  in  which  the 
doctrine  of  the  atonement  places  God  the  Father  and  God 
the  Son.  The  two,  it  is  said,  are  represented  as  antagon- 
istic to  each  other — the  Father  as  requiring  atonement, 
tlie  Son  as  giving  it  —  whereas  the  Scriptures  always 
exhibit  the  Father  in  the  same  attitude  of  love  toward 
mankind  as  the  Son. 

This  objection  bears  rather  upon  our  imperfect  concep- 


THE   REDEMPTIVE    WORK    OF   CHRIST  401 

tion  of  the  facts  than  upon  the  facts  themselves.  It  is 
liard  to  keep  all  the  elements  of  the  truth  iu  due  relation 
to  each  other  in  our  thoughts  and  language  upon  this 
profound  subject.  We  are  apt  to  use  trinitarian  language 
while  speaking  of  the  love  of  God,  and  tritheistic  lan- 
guage when  discussing  the  atonement.  But,  in  fact, 
Father,  Son,  and  Spirit  are  all  active  alike  in  the  love 
which  originates  the  atonement  and  the  acts  by  which  it 
is  carried  out.  God  through  the  medium  of  the  God- 
man  makes  atonement  to  Himself  for  men.  The  Father 
and  the  Son  were  never  in  closer  accord  than  when 
Jesus  Christ  died  upon  the  cross.  I  do  not  deny  that 
the  receiving  of  the  atonement  belonged  in  an  especial 
sense  to  the  Father  and  the  rendering  of  it  to  the  Son. 
Nor  do  I  deny  that  there  is  in  our  conception  of  the 
truth  a  certain  straining  of  the  trinitarian  relations  in- 
volved in  the  death  of  Christ — a  straining  incident  to 
the  incarnation  during  the  lowest  stage  in  the  state  of 
humiliation — a  straining  which  made  it  possible  for  Christ 
to  utter  then,  with  a  meaning  which  would  not  attach  to 
them  at  any  other  time,  the  words,  "  My  God,  my  God, 
why  hast  thou  forsaken  me  ? "  But  we  have  in  the  teach- 
ings of  revelation  the  key  to  the  mystery,  and  may,  if  we 
can  penetrate  far  enough  into  the  inmost  meaning  of  the 
Gospel,  see  how,  even  in  the  apparent  separation,  there  was 
the  closest  fellowship.  Christ  himself  has  taught  us  that 
he  who  will  save  his  life  must  lose  it,  that  greatness  con- 
sists in  humiliation.  There  is  in  all  love  a  straining  of 
the  inner  life,  a  giving  ourselves  away  that  we  may  find 
ourselves  again.  This  is  the  explanation  of  the  apparent 
separation  of  the  Father  and  the  Son.  It  is  God  giving 
His  Son,  God  sparing  not  His  Son.  It  is  a  deptli  of  love 
and  divine  greatness  that  can  be  understood  only  through 
a  paradox — only  as  we  take  together  two  cries  of  Christ, 
"  My  God,  why  hast  thou  forsaken  me  1 "  and  "  Fathei, 
into  thy  hands  I  commend  my  spirit." 

26  * 


XXII. 

THE    REDEMPTIVE    WORK   OP    CHRIST 

(3.    The  Administration  of  Redemption) 

The  topics  which  I  wisli  to  discuss  in  tlie  present 
chapter  are — 

I.  The  Kingly  Office  of  Clnist ; 

II.  His  Work  through  the  Holy  Spirit ;  and 
HI.  The  Scope  of  his  Kedeniptive  Work. 

I.  The  consideration  of  the  tliiixl  factor  in  Christ's 
work  of  redemption,  namely,  his  kingly  office,  brings  us 
upon  ground  already  traversed  in  part  in  our  examination 
of  the  doctrines  of  the  kingdom  of  God  and  the  pei-son  of 
Christ.  The  importance  of  the  subject  will  justify  the 
repetition  which  its  treatment  will  involve.  It  is  to  be 
noted,  however,  that  while  the  subject-matter  is  to  some 
extent  the  same,  the  point  of  view  is  altogether  different. 
We  shall  be  engaged  in  our  present  inquiries  not  with  the 
nature  of  the  redemptive  kingdom  nor  with  the  dignity 
of  the  messianic  King,  but  with  the  kingly  element  in  the 
Saviour's  work  regarded  as  a  divine  provision  for  the 
accomplishment  of  redemption. 

Of  the  three  factors  of  the  saving  work — the  revelation, 
the  atonement,  and  the  kingly  office — the  last  is  in  some 
respects  the  most  important.  It  is  the  practical  element, 
directly  connected  with  the  execution  of  redemption. 
Revelation  is  indeed  the  absolutely  essential  prerequisite. 
Inasmuch  as  the  work  is  to  be  can-ied  out  through  human 
agencies,  men  must  know  God  as  Ho  is.  The  Woi'd  must 
become  llesh  and  the  divine  irrace  and  truth  be  manifested 


THE   REDEMPTIVE   WORK    OF   CIIKIST  403 

through  him.  Wo  cannot  conceive  of  redemption  apart 
from  tlie  actual  presence  on  earth  of  God  in  Christ,  So 
also  the  atonement  is  absolutely  essential,  a  conditio  sine 
qua  non.  It  is,  as  we  have  seen,  central  in  the  redemp- 
tive work,  concentrating  all  that  is  most  sacred  and  pre- 
cious in  it.  It  is  the  throbbing,  life-giving  heart  of  re- 
demption. But  both  the  revelation  and  the  atonement 
would  remain  ineffectual  without  the  kingly  office.  It  is 
not  enough  that  the  way  should  be  prepared  for  salva- 
tion ;  there  must  be  an  actual  salvation.  Ilevelation  and 
atonement  are  not  self-operative.  It  would  not  have  been 
sufficient  to  provide  these  elements  of  redemption  and 
leave  the  world  to  appropriate  them  as  it  could.  Men  are 
to  be  saved  by  the  truth  ;  but  the  naked  truth,  even 
though  it  was  the  truth  of  the  Gospel,  never  did  and 
never  could  save  any  one.  Men  are  to  be  saved  by  aton- 
ing grace  ;  but  the  atonement  alone  never  saved  any  one, 
even  when  accompanied  by  the  truth  of  the  Gospel. 
There  must  be  a  direct  exercise  of  jooiaer,  an  actual  lay- 
ing hold  of  sinners  and  applying  the  truth,  and  the  aton- 
ing grace  to  them — power  by  which  they  may  be  called, 
justified,  sanctified,  saved. 

It  is  this  actual  application  of  the  divine  grace  to  the 
salvation  of  the  sinful  world  that  is  provided  for  by  the 
kingly  office  of  Christ.  The  Saviour  did  not  to  any  con- 
siderable degree  enter  upon  the  practical  work  of  salva- 
tion during  his  earthly  ministry.  He  did  not  intend  to 
do  so.  His  work  was  chiefly  preparatory.  He  contented 
himself  with  gathering  about  him  a  little  band  of  dis- 
ciples and  educating  them  to  be  his  instruments  in  the 
great  redemptive  work  which  was  to  begin  after  his  as- 
cension. He  was,  indeed,  a  King  while  still  in  this  world ; 
he  showed  it  in  his  miracles  and  in  all  his  messianic  activ- 
ity. But  he  Was  rather  a  king  by  right  than  by  actual 
exercise  of  authority.  It  was  when  he  ascended  into 
heaven  and  sat  down  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  that  the 


404  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

truly  kingly  work,  the  work  of  establishing  his  kingdom 
in  the  world,  began.  We  saw,  when  we  were  investigat- 
ing the  doctrine  of  Christ's  person,  that  the  real  corona- 
tion of  the  Messiah  took  place  at  his  ascension.  !Not  till 
then  was  he  ready  for  his  great  task  of  subduing  the 
world  to  himself.  Then  he  began  to  exercise  the  author- 
ity whicli  liad  been  given  him  in  heaven  and  on  earth 
(Matt,  xxviii.  18).  Then  the  term  Lord,  which  his  disciples 
had  begun  to  apply  to  him  while  lie  was  on  earth,  received 
its  full  messianic  meaning. 

The  kingly  oltice  of  Christ  implies  his  constant  pres- 
ence and  activity  in  tlie  world.  Tlie  promise  whicli  he 
gave  his  disciples  was  that  he  would  be  with  them  always, 
even  unto  the  end  of  the  world  (Matt,  xxviii.  20).  From 
the  day  of  Pentecost  onward  he  manifested  liis  power 
through  the  Holy  Spirit.  He  is  the  invisible  but  potent 
source  of  all  the  work  of  the  kingdom.  Christians  do 
their  work  as  his  instruments.  Every  soul  that  is  rescued 
from  sin  is  rescued  by  him.  Each  forward  movement  of 
the  kingdom  is  due  to  his  efficiency. 

We  may  distinguish  a  general  and  a  particular  element 
in  the  Saviour's  kingly  work,  the  former  subsidiary  to  the 
latter. 

In  the  first  place,  Christ  rules  over  the  whole  universe. 
In  order  that  he  may  accomplish  the  work  of  redemption, 
God  has  put  into  the  hands  of  the  God-man  the  adminis- 
tration of  Ilis  providence.  The  Redeemer  is  now  the 
providential  Governor.  In  his  person  our  hunumity  sits 
upon  the  throne  and  shai'es  in  the  government  of  the 
world.  The  material,  intellectual,  and  moral  forces  of  the 
universe  are  subject  to  him  and  he  uses  them  to  advance 
the  kingdom  of  God.  Under  his  guidance  the  natural 
world  is  playing  its  part  in  the  work  of  redemption.  Tlie 
stars  in  their  courses  fight  against  the  enemies  of  the 
Saviour's  redemptive  kingdom,  and  the  creation,  groaning 
and  travailing  in  pain  together  in  its  bondage  of  corrup- 


THE   REDEMPTIVE   WORK    OF   CHRIST  40") 

tion,  is  made  to  do  its  part  not  only  for  the  salvation  of 
men,  but  also  for  its  own  deliverance  into  the  liberty  of 
the  glory  of  the  children  of  God  (Kom.  viii.  21,  22).  '  All 
things  in  the  material  sphere  work  together  for  good  to 
them  that  love  God  (Rom.  viii.  28),  because  the  Saviour 
is  on  the  throne.  He  rules  also  in  human  life  and  histor3\ 
The  true  King  of  men  is  the  glorified  Saviour.  Earthly 
monarchs  and  govermnents  possess  authority  only  as  they 
derive  it  from  him.  They  are  usurpers  when  thej^  set 
themselves  up  in  their  own  strength  and  think  to  rule  in 
opposition  to  him.  Christian  history  is  fulfilling  with 
wonderful  truth  the  second  Psalm,  "  The  kings  of  the 
earth  set  themselves,  and  the  rnlers  take  counsel  together, 
against  the  Lord,  and  against  his  anointed,  saying.  Let  us 
break  their  bands  asunder,  and  cast  away  their  cords  from 
us.  Lie  that  sitteth  in  the  heavens  shall  laugh  ;  the  Lord 
shall  have  them  in  deiision."  The  warning  still  holds 
good,  "  ISTow  therefore  be  wise,  O  ye  kings  ;  be  instructed 
ye  judges  of  the  earth.  .  .  .  Kiss  the  Son,  lest  he  be 
angry,  and  ye  perish  in  the  way,  for  his  wrath  will  soon 
be  kindled."  Popular  thought,  even  among  Christians, 
makes  a  sharp  line  of  separation  between  religious  and 
secular  things,  and  confines  Christ's  activity  to  the  former. 
But  no  view  could  be  more  unscriptural  and  irrational. 
The  Saviour  is,  as  John  calls  him,  the  "  King  of  kings  and 
Lord  of  lords  "  (Rev.  xix.  16),  not  in  a  metaphorical  but  a 
literal  sense.  He  is  the  real  power  in  all  politics,  in  all 
social  movements,  in  all  moral  reforms,  in  all  intellectual 
progress.  He  is  using  all  the  institutions  of  mankind  to 
advance  his  work — the  family,  the  state,  the  school,  the 
church,  commerce,  and  the  rest.  He  was  working  in  and 
through  the  merchants  and  diplomatists  who  opened  the 
door  for  our  missionaries  to  enter  China.  Livingstone  and 
Stanley  and  Baker  were  doing  his  bidding  when  thej^  ex- 
plored Africa  and  prepared  the  way  for  the  incoming  of 
the  Gospel.     So  in  the  narrower  sphere  of  individual  life 


406  PRESENT   DAY   TTTKOLOPtY 

Christ  is  at  work,  turning,  guiding,  shaping  events,  send- 
ing now  prosperity  and  now  adversity,  now  joy  and  now 
bereavement,  changing  the  current  of  life  and  destiny, 
iiolding  in  his  hands  the  issues  of  life  and  death — all  with 
reference  to  the  great  end.  This  larger  providential  rule 
of  Christ  is,  as  has  been  said,  all  subordinated  to  his  work 
of  salvation.  It  is  the  method  by  which  he  does  the  pre- 
paratory, and  what  we  might  call  the  rough  work  of  sal- 
vation. The  world  itself  was  shaped  with  reference  to 
this  use,  and  it  is  a  most  effective  instrument  in  the  Sav- 
iour's hands.  If  we  only  had  the  faith  to  apprehend  the 
things  unseen  and  eternal  in  the  things  seen  and  tempo- 
ral, we  should  discover  in  everj-  running  brook  and  every 
breaking  dawn,  in  every  event  of  history  and  every  experi- 
ence of  life,  the  presence  of  the  Saviour  working  for  hu- 
man redemption. 

In  a  second  and  more  especial  sense  Christ's  kingly  of- 
fice is  exercised  in  and  over  his  church.  This  is  pre-emi- 
nently the  realm  of  grace.  Paul  says,  God  "gave  him  to 
be  head  over  all  things  to  the  church,  which  is  his  body, 
the  fulness  of  him  that  fiUeth  all  in  all  "  (Eph.  i.  22,  23). 
I  am  referring  now  not  so  much  to  the  church  as  an  out- 
ward institution  as  to  what  is  called  the  "  invisible 
church,"  which  is  composed  of  all  true  believers.  It  is 
here  that  the  kingdom  of  God  has  actually  come,  for  here 
the  sway  of  the  Father  and  the  Saviour  is  gladly  and  will- 
ingly acknowledged.  Each  soul  in  this  invisible  church 
has  been  called  by  Christ's  Spirit,  forgiven  on  the  ground 
of  his  atonement,  regenerated  by  his  grace,  and  is  being 
saved  by  his  power  through  obedience  and  sanetification. 
These  members  of  Christ's  body,  his  faithful  disciples  and 
followers,  are  engaged  in  his  service  ;  it  is  their  life-work 
to  carry  out  his  work  of  redemption.  It  is  through  them 
that  he  works  directly  in  bringing  other  souls  to  his  king- 
dom. Whereas  in  the  broader  sphere  of  his  providential 
working;  his  instruments  are  to  a  larcce  extent  unwillinsr 


TTIE   EEDEMPTIVE   WOKK   OF   CnUIST  407 

agents,  here  all  are  by  their  own  free  choice  devoted  to  his 
service.  All  the  highest  work  of  the  kingdom  is  done  by 
them.  It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  since  the  days  of 
miracles  and  direct  revelations  ceased,  no  sonl  has  been 
converted  to  the  Saviour  except  through  the  instrumen- 
tality of  Christian  men  or  women.  To  them  is  committed 
the  ministry  of  reconciliation ;  they  build  up  the  church 
as  an  outward  and  visible  institution  ;  they  advance  the 
kingdom  in  foreign  lands  and  lead  the  heathen  to  the 
Saviour  of  the  world.  ISTay,  even  Christ  seems  to  have 
made  the  progress  of  the  kingdom  in  large  measure  de- 
pendent npon  their  exertions,  so  that  their  zeal  may  accel- 
erate it  and  their  sluggishness — for  we  are  speaking  of  im- 
perfect Christians — may  retard  it.  We  distinguish  these 
struggling  and  imperfect  believers  of  the  "  church  mili- 
tant "  from  the  "  church  triumphant,"  the  believers  who 
have  fought  the  good  fight  and  have  been  saved  and  per- 
fected. These  two  churches  are  in  reality  but  one,  a 
single  "  communion  of  the  saints,"  and  we  cannot  doubt 
that  the  company  of  the  blessed  on  high  are  engaged, 
though  in  ways  unknown  to  us,  in  the  same  blessed  work 
with  their  militant  brethren  below. 

The  broader  and  narrower  conceptions  of  Christ's  king- 
ly oflBce  are  connected  with  the  question  respecting  the 
duration  of  his  rule.  Ordinarily  in  the  Bible  the  reign  of 
the  Messiah  is  represented  as  everlasting.  "  He  shall 
reign  over  the  house  of  Jacob  forever,  and  of  his  kingdom 
there  shall  be  no  end  "  (Luke  i.  33).  At  the  same  time 
there  is  one  passage  which  distinctly  teaches  a  termination 
of  his  reign.  Paul  speaks  of  "  the  end,  when  he  shall  de- 
liver up  the  kingdom  to  God,  even  the  Father  ;  when  he 
shall  have  abolished  all  rule  and  all  authority  and  power. 
For  he  must  reign  till  he  hath  put  all  his  enemies  under 
his  feet.  .  .  .  And  when  all  things  have  been  sub- 
jected unto  him,  then  shall  the  Son  also  himself  be  sub- 
jected to  him  that  did  subject  all  things  unto  him,  that 


408  PEESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

God  may  be  all  in  all "  (1  Cor.  xv.  24-28).  The  two  ap- 
parentl}^  contradictory  utterances  can  be  reconciled,  if  M-e 
understand  that  while  Christ's  rule  in  the  perfected  king- 
dom of  God  over  his  people  is  to  be  eternal,  the  broader 
rule  over  the  universe  for  the  purposes  of  redemption  is 
to  cease  as  no  longer  necessary  ;  all  evil  will  then  have 
ceased  and  the  work  of  redemption  be  complete.  The 
God -man — for  it  is  of  him  that  we  are  speaking,  and  not 
of  the  Son  in  his  exclusivelj"  divine  character — will  give 
back  this  providential  government  to  God,  and  lie  will  be 
once  more  all  in  all.  Bnt  the  Saviour,  divine  and  human, 
will  remain  eternally  the  King  of  his  people,  the  Head  of 
the  messianic  kingdom. 

II.  Such  is  the  provision  made  in  the  kingly  office  of 
Christ  for  the  completion  of  salvation.  But  the  subject 
would  be  but  imperfectly  treated  if  1  should  omit  to  speak 
in  this  connection  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  It  is  through  the 
Spirit  that  Christ  executes  his  kingly  office.  His  woik 
of  grace  is  the  work  of  the  Spirit. 

The  thoughtful  reader  of  the  Bible  is  struck  \vith  the 
fact  that  the  functions  of  the  Spirit  under  the  two  dispen- 
sations of  God's  redemptive  gi-ace  are  entirely  different. 
With  the  day  of  Pentecost  begins  an  entii-ely  new  activ- 
ity of  the  Third  Person  of  the  Trinity,  Wherein  con- 
sists the  diifei-ence,  and  what  is  the  office  of  the  Spirit 
under  the  IN^ew  Dispensation  ?  The  answer  is  not  far  to 
seek.  Since  the  ministr}^  and  ascension  of  Christ  it  has 
been  the  work  of  the  Spirit  to  carry  out  his  work,  to  be 
his  agent  in  the  execution  of  his  redemptive  task.  The 
God-man  is  in  heaven,  separated — at  least  so  far  as  his  hu- 
man nature  is  concerned — from  the  world.  There  he  is  to 
abide  until  the  time  of  the  second  coming,  when  he  will 
return  to  bring  the  work  of  i-edemption  to  its  glorious  con- 
clusion. Meantime  he  exercises  his  power  and  manifests 
his  presence  on  earth  through  the  Spirit.  When  lie  was 
about  to  leave  his  disciples,  he  declared  that  he  would  not 


THE   REDEMPTIVE   WORK    OF   CTIRTRT  409 

leave  them  orphans,  but  tliat  he  would  come  mito  them. 
He  promised  to  send  them  the  Paraclete,  or  Helper,  who 
should  be  his  representative.  "  He  shall  glorify  me,"  he 
said,  "  for  he  shall  take  of  mine  and  shall  declare  it  unto 
yon  "  (John  xvi.  14).  The  great  practical  work  of  re- 
demption was  to  be  done  thi-ough  him  :  "He,  when  he  is 
come,  will  convict  the  world  in  respect  of  sin,  and  of 
righteonsness,  and  of  judgment :  of  sin,  because  they  be- 
lieve not  on  me ;  of  righteousness,  because  I  go  to  the 
Father  and  ye  behold  me  no  more;  of  judgment,  because 
the  prince  of  this  world  hath  been  judged  "  (John  xvi.  8- 
11).  He  was  to  be  the  Inspirer  through  whom  the  apostles 
should  be  capacitated  for  their  work,  in  word  and  miracle. 
The  Saviour  after  his  resurrection  ascended  into  heaven, 
leaving  his  disciples  the  assurance,  "  Behold  I  send  forth 
the  promise  of  my  Father  upon  you,"  and  the  command, 
"  Tarry  ye  in  the  city  until  ye  be  clothed  with  power 
from  on  high  "  (Luke  xxiv.  49).  The  promise  was  ful- 
filled on  the  day  of  Pentecost.  The  coming  of  the  Spirit 
in  power  was  the  sure  evidence  that  Jesus  was  indeed  the 
Christ.  "  Being  therefore  by  the  right  hand  of  God  ex- 
alted," said  Peter,  "  and  having  received  of  the  Father 
the  promise  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  hath  poured  forth  this, 
which  ye  see  and  hear"  (Acts  ii.  33).  It  was  the  begin- 
ning of  the  actual  salvation,  and  on  the  ground  of  this 
manifestation  of  the  redemptive  power  of  the  risen  Christ, 
the  Apostle  preached  the  Gospel  of  the  divine  grace  and 
made  the  free  offer  of  its  benefits  :  "  Repent  ye,  and  be 
baptized,  every  one  of  you,  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ, 
unto  the  remission  of  your  sins  ;  and  ye  shall  receive  the 
gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost "  (Acts  ii.  38). 

Such  in  general  is  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  re- 
demption.    Let  us  now  look  at  some  of  the  details. 

It  is  through  the  Spirit  that  Christ  performs  that  larger 
providential  work  in  the  interests  of  redemption  of  which 
mention  has  been  made.     The  Spirit  from  the  beginning 


410  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

lias  been  God's  agent  in  His  providential  operations. 
Wherever  the  Creator  comes  into  contact  with  the  creat- 
ure, it  is  through  the  Spirit.  But  now  the  Spirit  pei-forms 
this  office  in  the  execution  of  Christ's  redemptive  provi- 
dence. Through  him  the  Saviour  rules  in  nature,  acts 
upon  the  human  soul,  speaks  in  every  conscience,  guides 
the  course  of  history. 

The  Spirit  draws  men  to  Christ.  It  is  through  his 
agency  that  the  risen  Saviour  enters  every  soul  and  be- 
comes not  merely  as  the  Logos  but  as  the  God-man,  "  the 
light  that  lighteth  every  man  that  cometli  into  the  world  " 
(John  i.  9).  He  pleads  with  men  to  bring  them  to  Christ. 
He  gives  eflBcacy  to  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel.  The  sin 
against  the  Holy  Ghost  is  an  unpardonable  sin,  because 
when  he  is  finally  rejected  Christ  has  no  other  means  b}' 
which  he  can  reach  the  soul ;  the  resources  of  his  grace 
are  exhausted. 

It  is  through  the  Spirit  that  Christ  regenerates  men. 
Faith  on  the  human  side  opens  the  closed  temple  of  the 
human  heart  to  its  rightful  owner.  By  the  Spirit  the 
Father  and  Christ  enter  and  take  possession.  So  another 
and  higher  life  begins.  Old  things  have  passed  away  and 
all  things  become  new.  The  evil  choice  of  self  and  the 
world  is  supplanted  by  the  holy  choice  of  God  and  His 
kingdom.  The  Spirit  bears  inward  witness  of  God's  for- 
giving grace,  of  peace  with  God  and  Sonship.  The  Spirit 
is  the  medium  of  the  new  life  of  communion  and  fellow- 
ship between  Christ  and  the  believer,  which  is  the  begin- 
ning of  eternal  life.  The  disciple  of  Christ  is  united  with 
his  Master  as  a  branch  of  the  true  vine  (John  xv.  1-S). 
Christ  dwells  in  his  heart  by  faith  (Eph.  iii.  IG,  17). 

Christ  performs  his  work  of  sanctification  by  the  Spirit, 
(Gal.  V.  22),  and  by  him  capacitates  his  disciples  for  the 
special  duties  of  their  Christian  calling  (1  Cor.  xii.  4— 
13).  His  presence  is  the  pledge  of  that  redemption  of 
the  human  body    which  Christ  is  to  accomplish  at  the 


THE   EEDEMPTIYE   WORK    OF   CHRIST  411 

resurrection  (2  Cor.  v.  5).  Tlirongh  liis  power  the  child 
of  God  will  be  saved  and  glorified. 

Especially  Christ's  kingly  work  in  the  church  is 
through  the  agency  of  the  Spirit.  It  is  Christ's  presence 
among  his  disciples  through  the  Spirit  that  makes  the 
church.  Tlirough  him  the  members  of  Christ's  body  are 
bound  to  him  and  to  each  other.  The  ordinances  of  the 
church,  the  word,  the  sacraments,  and  prayer  are  made 
real  "  means  of  grace  "  by  liis  agency. 

III.  Our  examination  of  the  factors  of  Christ's  re- 
demptive work  is  now  complete,  but  we  have  still  to  ask 
concerning  its  scope.  Was  redemption  intended  for  all 
mankind  or  for  only  a  part  ?  And  if  it  was  intended 
for  all,  how  is  it  brought  to  bear  upon  those  who  have 
not  had  the  Gospel  preached  to  them  ? 

The  first  of  these  questions  is  usually  stated  more  nar- 
rowly, being  made  to  refer  to  the  extent  of  the  atone- 
ment. But  there  is  no  reason  why  we  should  not  ask  it 
with  reference  to  the  whole  redemptive  work  of  Clnist. 
In  making  the  provision  for  redemption  through  the 
prophetical,  priestly,  and  kingly  work  of  Christ,  did  God 
mean  it  for  all  men,  in  the  sense  that  it  should  be  freel}' 
offered  to  all,  and  that  all  should  have  a  full  and  fair 
opportunity  to  accept  it  ? 

There  has  been  from  the  earliest  days  of  Protestants 
a  school  of  theologians  who  have  answered  this  question 
in  the  negative.  Thej  do  not  deny  that  Christ's  work  is 
sufficient  for  all,  but  they  affirm  that  it  was  intended  onl}^ 
for  the  elect,  and  that  it  is  placed  within  the  reach  of  the 
elect  alone.  Out  of  the  mass  of  fallen  men  God  from  all 
eternity  chose  a  certain  number  that  He  might  bestow 
eternal  life  upon  them.  The  Saviour's  redemptive  work 
was  intended  for  them,  and  them  alone.  They  appeal  to 
those  passages  in  which  Christ  is  said  to  have  laid  down 
his  life  for  his  sheep  (John  x.  11),  to  have  died  for  his 
friends  (John  xv.  13-16),  to  have  made  intercession  for 


412  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

his  disciples  (John  xvii.  6-19)  ;  and  to  those  in  wliich  his 
death  is  declared  to  have  been  for  the  elect  or  for  the 
church  (Eom.  viii.  32,  33 ;  Eph.  v.  25-27). 

All  will  admit  that  some  are  actually  saved,  and  that 
others  are  not,  and  that  God  who  knows  the  end  from  the 
beginning  has  inclnded  both  classes  in  His  all-comprehend- 
ing eternal  purpose.  But  it  does  not  follow  from  this 
that  God  meant  to  restrict  the  provision  for  redemption 
to  one  class.  The  question  is,  what  has  revelation  to  tell 
us  on  the  subject  ?  Granting  that  there  are  a  few  pas- 
sao-es  in  the  Bible  which  relate  to  the  bearino;  of  the  re- 
demptive  work  upon  those  who  are  actually  saved,  are 
there  none  that  give  redemption  a  wider  scope  ?  If  there 
are,  common-sense  teaches  us  to  interpret  the  passages  of 
more  restricted  import  by  those  of  wider  bearing,  unless 
the  former  are  so  worded  as  to  distinctly  exclude  the 
latter.  Now  there  can  be  no  question — except  to  those 
who  have  a  theory  to  maintain — that  the  Bible  teaches 
clearly  and  nnequivocally  the  universalit}^  of  the  provision 
for  salvation.  The  offer  of  the  Gospel  is  made  to  all 
men,  in  language  that  is  a  ghastly  mockery,  if  it  is  in- 
tended only  for  a  part.  The  call  is,  "  Ho,  every  one 
that  thirsteth,  come  ye  to  the  waters ! "  (Isai.  Iv.  1). 
"  Come  unto  me  all  ye  that  labor,  and  are  heavy  laden, 
and  I  will  give  you  rest "  (Matt.  xi.  28).  "  Whosoever 
will,  let  him  take  of  the  water  of  life  freely  "  (Rev.  xxii. 
17).  All  men  are  commanded  to  repent  (Mark  i.  15, 
Acts  xvii.  30).  In  that  wonderful  passage  in  which  Paul 
compares  the  effects  of  Adam's  sin  with  those  of  Christ's 
redemptive  w^ork,  the  latter  are  made  coextensive  with 
the  former:  "So  then  as  through  one  trespass  the  judg- 
ment came  nnto  all  men  to  condemnation  ;  even  so 
through  one  act  of  righteousness  the  free  gift  came  nnto 
all  men  unto  jnstification "  (Bom.  v.  18).  This  passage 
can  be  limited  to  the  elect  only  by  conceding  the  conten- 
tion of  the  Universalists  that  all  men  are  elect.     Its  true 


THE    REDEMPTIVE    WORK    OF    CHRIST  413 

meainiig  is  that  the  provision  for  redemption  extends 
to  all  men,  and  that  all  men  have  the  opportunity 
to  appropriate  it.  There  are,  besides,  a  number  of  pas- 
sages in  wliich  Christ's  work  is  distinctly  said  to  have 
been  for  all  men.  "  Behold  the  Lamb  of  God,"  said 
John,  "  that  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world  "  (John  i. 
29),  not  the  elect,  but  the  world.  "  God  so  loved  the 
world  that  he  gave  his  only-begotten  Son "  (John  iii. 
16).  "  The  bread  which  I  will  give  is  my  flesh  for  the 
life  of  the  world  "  (John  vi.  51).  We  are  told  that  Je- 
sus, because  of  the  suffering  of  death,  was  crowned  with 
glory  and  honor,  "  that  by  the  grace  of  God  he  should 
taste  death  for  every  man  "  (Heb.  ii.  9).  John  declares, 
"  He  is  the  propitiation  for  our  sins,  and  not  for  ours  only, 
but  also  for  the  whole  world  "  (1  John  ii.  2).  Paul  em- 
ploys language  equally  strong.  He  speaks  of  "  God  our 
Saviour,  who  willeth  that  all  men  should  be  saved  and 
come  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth.  For  there  .is  one 
God,  one  mediator  ,also  between  God  and  men,  himself 
man,  Christ  Jesus,  who  gave  himself  a  ransom  for  all " 
(1  Tim.  ii.  4-6) ;  and  of  "  the  living  God,  who  is  the 
Saviour  of  all  men,  specially  of  them  that  believe"  (1 
Tim.  iv.  10)  ;  and  of  "  the  grace  of  God  "  which  "  hath 
appeared,  bringing  salvation  to  all  men "  (Tit.  ii.  11). 
In  the  presence  of  such  strong  and  explicit  scriptural  as- 
sertions it  seems  needless  to  argue  the  case  at  all.  The 
teaching  of  revelation  is  that  the  redemptive  work  of 
Christ  was  intended  for  all  men  without  exception,  and  is 
placed  within  the  reach  of  all  men,  so  that  if  any  fail  to 
secure  its  benefits,  the  fault  lies  with  themselves. 

It  is  not  so  easy  to  answer  the  second  question  which 
we  proposed  to  ourselves,  namely,  how  the  redemptive 
work  of  Christ  is  made  available  for  those  who  have  not 
had  the  Gospel  preached  to  them  and  so  ai'e  ignorant  of 
the  divine  grace.  Upon  this  point  the  Scripture  does  not 
give  us  the  information  which  we  desire.    Nevertheless,  fol- 


414  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

lowing  the  general  lines  of  scriptural  teaching,  we  need 
not  be  wholly  at  a  loss  for  an  explanation.  There  are  two 
facts  which  together  suggest  such  possibilities  as  to  make 
it  evident  that  there  is  no  hinderance  in  the  divine  order- 
ing of  the  universe  to  the  bringing  to  bear  of  Christ's  re- 
demptive grace  upon  every  soul.  The  lirst  of  these  facts 
is  the  relation  of  grace  into  which  all  mankind  has  been 
brought  by  Christ's  work.  God's  attitude  toward  men  is 
one  of  reconciliation — not,  of  course,  a  complete  reconcili- 
ation, so  long  as  men  fail  to  appropriate  the  divine  grace, 
but  complete  so  far  as  God's  sole  action  can  make  it. 
As  the  result  of  the  Saviour's  work  mankind  has  been 
placed  upon  a  Christian  basis.  There  is  reason  to  believe 
that  in  this  way  every  soul,  whether  knowing  what  Christ 
has  done  or  not,  receives  the  benefit  of  his  work.  The 
Holy  Spirit  works  upon  every  heart,  and  that  Spirit  is  the 
Spii'it  of  Christ,  and  comes  with  the  grace  of  his  I'edemp- 
tion.  It  is  a  great  advantage  to  hear  the  Gospel  and  learn 
the  story  of  the  cross,  but  the  grace  of  the  cross  does  not 
come  to  the  soul  through  the  ear  alone.  God  is  not  so 
irrudiiino'  of  the  grace  which  He  has  furnished  in  His  Son 
as  to  give  it  only  to  those  who  can  appropriate  the  gift 
with  full  knowledge  of  its  meaning.  Xo,  that  grace  is 
like  the  blessed  light  of  heaven  that  pours  into  every  soul, 
coming  through  eye  and  feeling,  coming  where  there  is 
knowledge  of  its  nature  and  where  there  is  not.  Now  as 
every  person  who  has  reached  the  age  of  moral  respon- 
sibility has  some  knowledge  of  God  and  duty,  and  may 
open  or  close  the  sanctuary  of  his  will  to  such  divine 
grace  as  he  knows,  even  those  who  have  not  heard  of 
Christ  may  receive  the  grace  of  Christ,  may  yield  to  the 
drawing  of  the  Father  to  the  Son  and  be  united  to  Christ 
through  the  Holy  Spirit.  Tlie  other  fact  of  which  I 
spoke  as  throwing  light  upon  the  subject  before  us  is  the 
opportunity  of  progress  in  the  other  life.  Salvation  will 
not  be  complete  until  all  the  effects  of  sin  are  removed. 


THE    REDEMPTIVE   WORK    OP    CHRIST  415 

All  that  is  needful,  in  order  that  a  soul  may  be  saved,  is 
that  such  a  begiiming  should  be  made  through  reconcili- 
ation with  God  as  will  give  His  grace  an  opportunity  to 
operate.  The  other  world  is  to  be  God's  school,  and  those 
who  have  not  heard  of  Christ  here,  yet  have  yielded  to 
His  grace  working  in  their  hearts,  will  have  full  oppor- 
tunity to  gain  the  higher  knowledge  and  training  which 
they  need  from  Christ  himself. 

Let  us  look  at  the  special  problems  which  come  up  in 
connection  with  the  general  one  upon  which  we  are  en- 
gaged. 

1.  In  what  relation  did  the  saints  of  the  Old  Dispensa- 
tion stand  to  Christ's  redemptive  work  ?  The  Bible  tells 
us  but  little  upon  the  subject,  but  its  few  utterances  and  its 
general  implications  are  sufficient  to  show  that  the  faith- 
ful who  lived  before  the  Saviour's  light  dawned  upon  the 
world  and  died  in  faith,  not  having  received  the  promises 
(Heb.  xi.  13),  were  saved  on  the  ground  and  through  the 
provisions  of  Christ's  redemptive  work.  The  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  which  deals  more  fully  with  this  subject  than 
any  other  book  of  the  Bible,  declares  that  Christ's  death 
took  place  "for  the  redemption  of  the  sins  that  were  under 
the  first  covenant,"  and  that  it  was  efficacious  for  all  the 
preceding  ages  of  the  world  (Heb.  ix.  15,  26),  and  after 
enumerating  the  heroes  of  faith,  represents  them  as  joined 
with  us  in  the  same  salvation.  The  great  type  of  Chris- 
tian faith  is  the  faith  of  Abraham,  who  believed  in  God 
and  it  was  counted  to  him  for  righteousness  (Gen.  xv.  6 ; 
Rom.  iv.  ;  Gal.  iii.  6  seq.).  These  Old  Testament  believers 
had  some  prevision  of  the  Messiah  through  the  types  of 
the  law  and  the  predictions  of  the  prophets,  but  it  was 
very  vague.  But  they  laid  hold  by  faith  upon  the  God 
of  redemption,  trusting  in  Him  and  His  gi'ace,  and  the 
grace  of  Christ,  not  yet  outwardly  made  known  to  the 
world,  but  already  potent  and  active,  was  bestowed  upon 
them.     Their  faith   was,  so  to  speak,  an  implicit   faith 


416  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

which  grasped  far  more  than  they  knew  or  could  under- 
stand. Doubtless  they  had  to  be  educated  and  brought  up 
to  the  level  of  the  New  Dispensation  after  they  reached 
the  other  world.  Possibly  there  is  truth  iu  the  venerable 
belief  of  the  Honian  Catholic  church  that  the  Saviour  at 
his  death  released  them  from  Hades  and  took  them  with 
him  into  heaven,  though  that  view  has  its  difficulties  and 
improbaljilities.  At  all  events  they  received  their  full 
knowledge  of  the  Saviour  and  his  salvation  only  in  the 
other  world.  "  Abraham  rejoiced  to  see  my  day,"  said 
Jesus,  "  and  he  saw  it  and  was  glad  "  (John  viii.  56j. 

2.  The  question  as  to  the  bearing  of  Christ's  work  upon 
those  who  die  in  infancy  is  of  more  importance  to  us.  A 
third  of  the  race  belong  to  this  class.  Are  they  saved, 
and  if  so,  how  are  they  saved  ?  The  Roman  Catholic 
church,  which  holds  that  the  redemptive  grace  of  Christ 
is  bestowed  upon  men  only  through  the  priesthood  and 
the  sacraments,  teaches  that  infants  dying  without  baptism 
are  lost,  although  this  harsh  doctrine  is  mitigated  by  the 
belief  that  the  punishment  of  such  unfortunates  is  wholly 
privative  and  unaccompanied  by  actual  suffering.  The 
earlier  Protestants  also  consented  to  the  doctrine  of  infant 
damnation,  the  Lutherans,  like  the  Poman  Catholics,  con- 
signing unbaptized  infants  to  perdition,  and  the  Calvin- 
ists  taking  the  same  ground  with  respect  to  non-elect 
infants.  But  a  fairer  exegesis  of  the  Scriptures,  and  a 
fuller  understanding  of  the  great  fundamental  principles 
of  Christianity,  have  brought  the  Protestant  churches 
almost,  if  not  quite,  unanimously  to  the  recognition  of  the 
universality  of  Christ's  grace  in  its  reference  to  this  class. 
If  Christ  himself  said,  '"  Forbid  them  not,  for  of  such  is 
the  kingdom  of  heaven"  (Matt.  xix.  14),  his  followers 
have  no  right  to  exclude  any  from  a  share  inliis  redemp- 
tion. The  only  power  that  can  tear  a  soul  away  from 
Christ  is  that  soul's  own  free  will ;  if  it  dies  before  it  has 
reached  the  period  of  clioico,  wc  may  be  sui-e  that  Christ 


THE    EEDEMPTIVE   WOEK   OF   CHRIST  417 

will  keep  his  hold  upon  it.  As  Dr.  Charles  Hodge  said, 
"All  the  descendants  of  Adan],  except  those  of  whom  it 
is  explicitly  revealed  that  they  cannot  inherit  the  kingdom 
of  God,  are  saved  "  ("  Systematic  Theology,"  vol.  i.,  p.  26). 
But  such  children  are  saved  not  apart  from  the  work  of 
Christ,  but  through  that  work.  Though  they  do  not  need 
to  be  forgiven  for  the  sins  they  have  never  committed, 
yet  they  are  members  of  a  sinful  race,  themselves  pos- 
sessed of  tendencies  to  sin,  which  would  in  due  time  mani- 
fest themselves,  were  they  left  to  themselves,  and  they 
need  for  their  perfecting  and  salvation  the  grace  of  that 
Saviour  who  died  for  all  mankind.  Death  ushers  them 
into  the  school  of  the  blessed  Master,  and  their  moral 
development  takes  place  under  his  fostering  love  in  the 
holy  environment  of  heaven. 

3.  A  far  more  difficult  question  confronts  us  when  we 
inquire  respecting  the  relation  of  Christ's  redemptive 
work  to  the  heathen.  The  reticence  of  the  Bible,  of 
which  mention  has  already  been  made,  is  nowhere  more 
striking  than  here.  We  shall  do  well  therefore  to  avoid 
all  dogmatism  respecting  this  dark  subject  and  to  exercise 
a  generous  Christian  tolerance  toward  those  who  differ 
from  us  in  their  conclusions.  Certainly,  however,  we 
cannot  be  mistaken  in  applying  to  this  class  the  doctrine 
which  we  have  found  clearly  taught  in  the  Scripture,  of 
the  universality  of  Christ's  redemptive  work.  The  view 
which  was  almost  universal  in  the  past,  and  which  still  is 
so  widely  maintained,  that  all  the  heathen,  to  whom  the 
Gospel  has  not  come  as  an  outward  message,  are  lost, 
finds  no  sufficient  warrant  in  the  Word  of  God.  There  is 
something  awful  in  the  thought  that  so  large  a  portion  of 
the  human  race  "  have  light  enough  to  condemn  them,  but 
not  light  enough  to  save  them."  This  rigorous  doctrine 
is  gradually  giving  way  to  a  larger  and  more  Christian 
belief,  and  even  those  who  hold  it  do  so  rather  because 

they  fear  by  letting  it  go  to  weaken  the  missionary  motive 

27 


418  PKESENT   DAY    THEOLOGY 

than  because  it  commends  itself  to  their  truer  Christian 
thought. 

But  if  we  hold  fast  to  this  belief  in  a  universal  oppor- 
tunity to  accept  God's  grace,  we  need  be  less  strenuous  as 
to  the  method  by  which  this  result  is  to  be  accomplished. 
In  any  case  it  must  be  through  the  Saviour's  redemptive 
grace  and  the  power  of  his  Ilol}'  Spirit. 

The  theory  is  widely  held  in  Germany  and  England, 
and  has  attained  considerable  currencj'  in  this  countiy 
during  the  last  ten  years,  that  God  gives  to  the  heathen 
after  death  an  opportunity  to  decide  for  or  against  Jesus 
Christ.  The  advocates  of  this  view  hold  that  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  Gospel  and  of  Christ  himself  is  needful  in 
order  that  there  should  be  a  full  and  fair  decision  of  the 
great  question  upon  which  human  destiny  depends.  They 
claim  that  the  Last  Judgment  is  the  time  when  God 
passes  His  final  sentence,  and  that  until  that  time  the 
opportunity  remains  open  for  those  to  accept  Christ  who 
have  had  no  opportunity  in  this  life.  Great  stress  is  laid 
upon  the  absoluteness  of  Christianity  and  the  need  that 
the  Gospel  should  be  brought  to  every  soul.  For  those 
who  have  not  had  a  probation  here,  there  must  be  one  in 
the  other  world.  Appeal  is  made  in  support  of  the  view 
to  those  passages  in  which,  according  to  a  widely  accepted 
interpretation,  Christ  is  said  to  have  preached  the  Gospel 
after  his  death  (1  Pet.  iii,  18-20 ;  iv.  6)  ;  but  the  theory 
rests  rather  upon  general  theological  principles  than  upon 
particular  texts. 

Another  theory,  which  has  found  somewhat  more  gen- 
eral acceptance,  maintains  that  this  life  is  for  the  heathen, 
as  for  all  men,  the  time  of  decision,  and  that  those 
heathen  who  avail  themselves  of  the  light  they  have,  are 
saved  on  the  ground  of  Christ's  atonement,  by  an  implicit 
faith  in  its  essential  character,  the  same  as  that  by  which 
the  patriarchs  were  saved.  Those  who  hold  this  view  lay 
stress  upon  the  universality  of  the  operations  of  Christ's 


THE   REDEMPTIVE   WORK    OF   CHRIST  419 

Spirit.  They  find  coiifinnatioii  of  their  theory  in  the 
dechiration  of  the  evangelist,  that  the  Logos  is  "  the  true 
light,  even  tlie  light  which  lighteth  every  man  coming 
into  the  world  "  (John  i.  9).  Their  belief  is  that  every 
man  has  a  sufficient  probation  in  this  life.  The  more 
candid  and  thoughtful  advocates  of  this  view  admit  that 
they  cannot  give  chapter  and  verse  of  the  Bible  in  support 
of  it,  the  texts  which  are  ordinaiily  given  not  being  able 
to  stand  the  test  of  a  careful  exegesis;  but  like  the  theo- 
logians who  hold  the  other  view,  they  believe  that  their 
conclusions  are  based  upon  the  general  principles  of  the 
Christian  system. 

I  cannot  agree  with  those  who  regai'd  the  theor}^  of  an 
extended  probation  for  the  heathen  as  a  dangerous  heresy, 
subversive  of  fundamental  Christian  truth.  A  belief  that 
is  not  contradicted  by  any  express  utterances  of  the  Word 
of  God,  and  does  not  militate  against  any  of  the  essential 
doctrines  of  Chiistianity,  and  which  has  for  its  object  the 
vindication  of  the  divine  righteousness  in  its  dealings 
with  a  majority  of  the  human  race,  has,  it  seems  to  me, 
its  right  of  existence,  when  it  is  held  with  due  recognition 
of  our  necessary  ignorance  respecting  this  dark  and  diffi- 
cult subject.  The  right  of  theological  speculation  respect- 
ing matters  upon  which  the  Scripture  is  silent  ought  to 
be  jealously  guarded,  so  long  as  it  does  not  run  into  an 
over-confident  dogmatism.  There  are  many  minds  that 
are  helped  by  this  theory  as  they  could  not  be  by  any 
other,  and  led  by  it  to  a  profounder  and  more  genuine 
trust  in  God. 

The  question,  however,  whether  on  the  whole  the  theory 
of  extended  probation  is  the  more  satisfactory,  and  whether 
it  accords  more  nearly  with  the  commonly  accepted  prin- 
ciples of  our  evangelical  theology,  is  a  different  one,  and  I 
am  inclined  to  answer  it  in  the  negative.  The  other  view 
has  indeed  its  difficulties.  But  in  theology  we  find  few 
theories  that  are  wholly  free  from  difficulties,  and  generally 


420  PKESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

have  to  content  ourselves  with  that  which  has  the  fewest. 
The  view  that  God  gives  to  the  heathen  a  sulticient  o})por- 
tunity  in  this  life  to  make  the  great  decision  seems  to  me 
the  most  satisfactory'.  The  Bible  everywhere  lays  its 
chief  emphasis  upon  two  periods — if  we  may  so  designate 
them  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  one  of  them  has  no  end — the 
present  life  and  the  eternal  ages  subsequent  to  the  Last 
Judgment.  The  intermediate  state  is  passed  over  with  a 
remarkable  reticence,  and  is  never  brought  into  connection 
with  the  great  luoral  and  spiritual  processes  by  which  God 
establishes  His  kingdom.  This  life  is  the  time  of  de- 
cision. The  Last  Judgment  is  not  so  much  the  time  for 
the  determination  of  individual  destin}',  as  for  the  vindi- 
cation of  the  divine  righteousness  in  the  historical  work  of 
redemption — the  great  Theodicy — and  for  the  assigning 
of  men  to  their  final  state  and  the  establishment  of  the 
eternal  order  of  things.  The  distinction  niade  by  the  old 
theologians  between  the  particular  judgment  which  takes 
place  at  death,  and  the  judgment  of  the  Last  Da}',  seems 
to  have  the  spirit,  if  not  the  letter,  of  the  New  Testament 
in  its  favor.  There  is  no  good  reason  for  assuming  that 
the  intermediate  state  is  a  period  for  the  decision  of  hu- 
man destiny.  If  it  is  a  state  of  probation,  it  must  be  a 
mixed  state,  the  good  and  the  evil  still  unseparated— a 
view  which  presents  peculiar  diflficulties. 

It  is  not  needful,  in  order  to  the  making  of  the  great  de- 
cision of  life,  that  men  should  have  a  knowledge  of  Christ 
and  his  redemptive  work.  It  is  sufficient  if  they  receive 
the  benefits  of  the  Saviour's  salvation  and  have  his  Spirit 
working  in  their  hearts.  I  am  far  from  claiming  that  they 
could  make  the  decision  upon  a  merely  natural  basis, 
apart  from  the  grace  of  Christ ;  all  that  I  assert  is  that  in 
order  to  a  decision  they  need  not  have  the  knowledge  of 
Christ.  I  am  not  impugning  the  principle  of  the  abso- 
luteness of  Christianity,  but  rather  vindicating  for  Chris- 
tianity a  universal  operation  in  the  present  life,  and  not 


THE   REDEMPTIVE   TVORK   OF   CTIRIST  421 

merely  in  tlie  other  life.  The  heathen  who  feels  the 
moving  of  God's  Spirit  in  his  soul,  and  recognizing  it  as 
divine,  gives  up  his  will  to  its  influence,  thereby  decides 
for  Christ,  and  I  verily  believe  is  accepted  by  Christ.  It 
is  not  the  knowledge  of  faith  which  makes  it  "saving;  " 
it  is  its  receptivit}'.  God — so  I  reverently  and  confidently 
believe — saves  every  man  who  will  let  himself  be  saved. 
The  smallest  and  feeblest  faith,  accompanied  by  a  mini- 
mum of  knowledge,  is  sufficient,  if  it  is  true  faith,  to 
give  God's  grace  a  foothold,  and  lie  will  do  the  rest. 

A  distinction  should  be  made  between  the  decision 
which  is  possible  in  this  life,  and  the  education  and  per- 
fecting which  can,  in  the  case  of  such  heathen  as  those  of 
whom  I  have  spoken,  take  place  only  in  the  other  world. 
For  the  latter  the  personal  knowledge  of  Christ  and  his 
work  is  undoubtedly  necessary.  But  the  soul  which  has 
chosen  the  highest  good  it  knew  will  gladly  welcome  the 
personal  manifestation  of  the  perfect  Good,  the  Savionr 
Jesus  Christ.  Let  such  a  soul,  with  a  faith  which  makes 
it  susceptible  to  divine  influences,  be  transferred  from  its 
dark  and  sinful  environment  in  this  world  to  the  school  of 
Christ,  where  it  will  be  surrounded  with  all  holy  influ- 
ences, and  the  work  of  growth  and  sanctification  will  go 
on  apace. 

The  question  how  many  heathen  are  saved  is  one  that 
we  cannot  answer.  There  is  not  much  to  encourage  us  in 
the  outward  life  of  heathendom.  But  we  must  remember 
that  the  heathen  are  not  to  be  judged  by  the  same  stand- 
ard as  those  who  have  been  brought  up  under  the  light  of 
the  Gospel.  God  may  see  what  we  do  not  see,  a  spark  of 
faith  in  the  soul,  which  His  grace  can  kindle  under  better 
conditions  into  a  bright  flame.  The  great  Gospel  princi- 
ple of  justification  by  faith,  with  its  denial  of  all  possible 
justification  by  works,  should  lead  us  to  look  away  from 
the  outward  and  hope  that  God  may  find  a  trne  faith 
within.    These  heathen  are  not  to  be  saved  bv  their  works 


422  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

any  more  than  we,  but  wholly  by  God's  grace.  It  may 
be  that  a  true  faith  may  exist  in  them  in  connection  with 
defects  and  sins  which  would  i-endcr  faith  in  us  impossi- 
ble. The  question  with  God  is,  whether  a  man  is  salva- 
ble,  and  if  he  is,  God  finds  a  way  to  save  him. 

Wlien  our  Saviour  uttered  his  wonderful  parables  of 
the  kingdom,  the  first  and  most  striking  had  reference  to 
the  sowing  of  the  Gospel  seed.  The  different  effect  pi-o- 
duced  in  different  hearts  w\as  made  to  depend  upon  a  dif- 
ferent state  of  those  liearts  as  regarded  their  susceptibil- 
ity. The  wayside,  the  rocky  places,  and  the  good  ground 
indicated  the  difference  in  this  i-espect  (Matt.  xiii.  1-23). 
The  Master  did  not  explain  how  the  hearts  came  to  be  in 
the  condition  in  whicli  the  Gospel  found  them,  but  the 
fair  inference  is  that  the  difference  lay  in  the  fi'ee  choices 
of  the  different  souls.  In  other  words,  there  is  a  pre- 
Christian  faith — pre-Christian  in  the  sense  of  preceding 
the  knowledge  of  Christ — as  well  as  a  pre-Christian  un- 
belief, which  practically  decide  destiny  and  anticipate  the 
outward  decision  which  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  brings 
about.  Tlie  Saviour  seems  to  have  had  the  same  fact  in 
mind  when  he  said,  "  Everyone  that  doetli  ill  hateth  tlie 
light,  and  cometh  not  to  the  light,  lost  his  works  should 
be  reproved.  But  he  that  doeth  the  truth  cometh  to  the 
light,  that  his  works  may  be  manifest,  that  they  have 
been  wrought  in  God  "  (John  iii.  20,  21).  He  said  to 
Pilate,  "  Every  one  that  is  of  the  truth  heareth  my  voice  " 
(Jolin  xix.  37).  Sucli  a  pre-Christian  faitli,  which  may 
render  even  the  most  ignorant  man  a  "  doer  of  the  truth," 
it  seems  to  me  may  be  exercised  by  many  heathen,  wlio 
will  in  the  other  w'orld  come  to  the  perfect  light,  and 
wliose  works  will  then  be  made  manifest  tliat  they  have 
been  wrought  in  God.  God  only  knows  how  many  such 
heathen  there  are.  While  the  Christian  church  is  so 
backward  in  the  work  of  missions  to  the  heatlien,  we  may 
well  hope  that  they  are  very  many. 


THE   REDEMPTIVE   TVOEK   OF   CHRIST  423 

Bat  the  question  is  asked,  Does  not  this  generous  hope 
for  the  heathen  weaken  and  even  destroy  the  motive  of 
Christian  missions?  I  reply  Xo  ;  most  emphatically  not. 
The  great  motive  of  missions  is  the  motive  derived  from 
the  chief  end  of  God's  plan  and  of  man's  existence,  the 
establishment  of  God's  kingdom.  Tlie  place  where  that 
kingdom  is  to  be  established  is  here,  in  this  world.  What 
God  is  seeking  in  His  redemptive  vi^ork  is  to  bring  this 
world  to  Christ,  not  merely  to  bring  souls  out  of  it  into 
heaven.  The  motive  of  missions  is  the  motive  of  the 
Gospel  everywhere,  to  bring  about  the  completion  of  re- 
demption, to  hasten  the  time  when  the  kingdom  of  the 
world  shall  become  the  kingdom  of  our  Lord  and  of  His 
Christ  (Rev.  xi.  15).  So  long  as  we  delay  this  work,  we 
trust  that  God  in  His  equity  will  allow  no  soul  to  perish 
simply  for  our  negligence.  But  this  trust  in  nowise  re- 
lieves us  from  our  duty.  It  is  ours  to  take  the  Gospel  to 
our  benighted  brethren  in  heathen  lands,  to  give  them  the 
same  privileges  which  we  possess,  and  the  same  glorious 
opportunities.  It  is  ours  to  roll  back  the  dark  shadow 
which  rests  upon  the  earth.  The  Saviour's  command  has 
been  given  us,  "  Go  ye  into  all  the  world,  and  preach  the 
Gospel  to  the  whole  creation "  (Mark  xvi.  15).  The 
fact  that  God  will  deal  equitably  with  all  men  and  save 
those  heathen  who  will  permit  themselves  to  be  saved 
should  not  encourage  us  to  be  remiss,  but  rather  stimulate 
us  to  greater  effort. 

If  we  cannot  send  the  missionary  to  the  heathen  unless 
we  are  sure  that  they  will  all  perish  if  he  stays  at  home, 
let  us  leave  the  work.  But  let  us  hope  that  God  will 
raise  up  a  race  of  men  who  can  preach  Christ  from  a  no- 
bler motive,  even  from  love  to  their  Saviour  and  their 
fellow-men. 


XXIII. 

ELECTION  AND  PREDESTINATION 

Ode  last  topic  was  the  universality  of  God's  grace  in 
Jesus  Christ.  But  the  question  arises,  Is  this  all  that  the 
Bible  teaches  ?  Is  there  not  alongside  of  its  universalism 
a  particularism  which  demands  equally  to  be  taken  into  ac- 
count ?  A  candid  study  of  the  Bible  permits  us  to  answer 
this  question  only  in  the  affirmative.  It  becomes  therefore 
a  matter  of  importance,  that,  before  entering  upon  the  sub- 
ject of  the  appropriation  of  redemption,  we  should  exam- 
ine this  scriptural  particularism  and  show,  if  we  can,  that  it 
is  consistent  with  the  universal  purpose  of  Christ's  redemp- 
tive work  and  the  bestowal  upon  all  men  of  the  opportu- 
nity to  accept  his  grace. 

I.  We  will  look  first  at  the  teachings  of  the  Bible  upon 
the  subject.  The  principle  of  election,  as  we  saw  when 
considering  the  redemptive  revelation,  occupies  a  promi- 
nent place  in  the  Old  Testament.  It  was  "  God's  method 
of  using  the  few  to  bless  the  many."  An  individual,  a  fam- 
ily, a  nation,  was  chosen  ;  invested  with  especial  blessings 
and  privileges  ;  educated  by  various  influences,  providen- 
tial and  miraculous;  made  the  recipient  of  divine  revela- 
tion ;  and  thus  capacitated  for  particular  functions  in 
God's  great  work  of  establishing  His  kingdom  in  the 
world.  Thus  the  divine  call  came  to  Abraham  to  get  out 
of  his  country  and  from  his  kindred,  and  from  his  father's 
house,  unto  a  land  which  God  should  show  him,  and  the 
])romise  was  given  that  he  should  become  a  great  nation, 
and  that  all  the  families  of  the  earth  should  be  blessed  in 


ELECTION   AND   PREDESTINATION  425 

him  (Geii.  xii.  1-3).  In  tliis  election  the  foundation  was 
laid  for  all  God's  future  work  of  redemption.  It  was  an 
election  of  grace,  resting  not  upon  the  good  works  of  the 
patriarch,  but  upon  the  divine  good  pleasure.  The  sub- 
jective condition  of  the  election  was  Abraham's  faith  ;  he 
believed  in  God,  and  He  counted  it  to  him  for  righteous- 
ness (Gen.  XV.  6).  But  this  faith,  which  was  the  conditio 
sine  qua  non,  the  receptivity  without  which  the  election 
would  have  remained  inoperative,  was  not  the  ground  of 
the  election,  still  less  its  cause  ;  the  efficiency  lay  in  the  di- 
vine grace  ;  and  the  faith,  although  it  involved  an  element 
of  personal  and  individual  freedom,  was  in  a  true  sense  the 
result  of  the  divine  education.  The  election  of  Abraham 
is  the  great  representative  or  typical  case  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament ;  all  the  other  instances  follow  the  same  model. 
Isaac,  the  son  of  promise,  was  chosen  from  the  two  sons 
of  Abraham.  The  divine  elective  grace  selected  Jacob 
and  passed  by  Esau  ;  "  for  the  children,  being  not  yet  born, 
neither  having  done  anything  good  or  bad,  that  the  pur- 
pose of  God  according  to  election  might  stand,  not  of 
works,  but  of  him  that  calleth,  it  was  said  unto  her  (Re- 
becca), The  elder  shall  serve  the  younger"  (Gen.  xxv. 
22,  23  ;  Rom.  ix.  11,  12).  Then  the  stream  of  election 
broadens  and  the  people  of  Israel  are  chosen  to  receive  the 
special  blessings  and  privileges  of  the  redemptive  revela- 
tion, and  to  be  the  bearers  of  the  divine  grace  to  the  na- 
tions of  the  earth.  Here,  also,  God  is  wholly  the  giver ; 
all  that  Israel  has  to  do  is  to  receive  the  blessing  and  carry 
out  the  divine  will.  "  The  Lord  thy  God  hath  chosen 
thee  to  be  a  peculiar  people  unto  himself,  above  all  peo- 
ples that  are  upon  the  face  of  the  earth.  The  Lord  did  not 
set  his  love  upon  you,  nor  choose  you,  because  ye  were 
more  in  number  than  any  people  ;  for  ye  were  the  fewest 
of  all  peoples  ;  but  because  the  Lord  loveth  you,  and  be- 
cause he  would  keep  the  oath  which  he  sware  unto  your 
fathers"  (Deut.  vii.  6-8).     The  principle  of  election  isfol- 


426  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

lowed  all  through  the  history  of  Israel  in  (-locrs  prosecu- 
tion of  the  work  of  redemption.  The  prophets,  priests, 
and  kings,  and  all  God's  instruments  in  the  establishment 
of  the  kingdom,  are  called  of  God  to  their  respective 
tasks.  The  Judges,  Saul,  David,  Elijah,  Elisha,  Isaiah, 
Jeremiah,  were  all  chosen  by  God  for  their  particular 
work.  Finally,  the  messianic  prophecies  point  to  the 
Christ  as  pre-eminently  God's  Chosen  One,  elected  for 
His  highest  tasks  and  made  the  recipient  of  His  greatest 
blessings  (Is.  xlii.  1).  The  peculiarity  of  this  Old  Testa- 
ment election  is  that  it  is  concerned  exclusively  w4tli  God's 
historical  process  of  redemption.  The  future  life  and  the 
eternal  blessedness  were  not  yet  revealed.  The  horizon  of 
revelation  in  this  stage  was  the  present  life.  The  blessings 
which  God  bestowed  were  temporal,  and  tlie  chief  end 
of  the  election  was  service  in  the  kingdom  on  earth.  As 
it  was  an  election  for  time,  so  it  was  an  election  in  time ; 
there  is  no  word  as  yet  of  an  eternal  decree  of  God  as  the 
foundation  of  the  choice. 

The  doctrine  —  like  all  the  doctrines  of  the  Bible  —  is 
deepened  and  enlarged  rather  than  changed  in  the  New 
Testament.  The  old  point  of  view  is  retained,  while  new 
and  far  higher  points  of  view  are  attained.  The  twelve 
apostles  are  called  and  chosen  for  their  great  work  in  the 
establishment  of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  its  Christian 
form  (Luke  vi.  13-16).  "Ye  did  not  choose  me,  but  I 
chose  you,  and  appointed  yon,  that  ye  should  go  and  bear 
fruit,  and  that  your  fruit  should  abide  "  (John  xv.  16).  So 
Paul  was  separated  from  his  mother's  womb  and  called, 
through  God's  grace,  that  he  might  preach  Christ  among 
the  Gentiles  (Gal.  i.  15,  16).  This  was  still  the  temporal 
election  for  tem])oral  purposes.  No  mention  was  made  as 
yet  of  a  fixed  and  eternal  element.  One  of  the  Twelve, 
though  elected  and  called,  frustrated  the  divine  grace  and 
became  a  repi'obate.  The  Old  Testament  idea  of  nation- 
al election  also  appears  in  the  New  Testament.     Israel  is 


ELECTION   AND   PREDESTINATION  427 

still  tiiG  Chosen  People,  but  God's  election  is  enlarged  to 
take  in  the  Gentiles,  and  when  Israel  rejects  the  grace  of 
Christ  its  former  prerogatives  are  taken  from  it,  and  it 
loses  its  place  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  This  is  the  subject 
with  which  Paul  is  engaged  in  the  ninth,  tenth,  and 
eleventh  chapters  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans — a  passage 
which  refers  primarily  to  the  great  question  of  national 
election,  and  is  intended  to  vindicate  God's  righteousness 
in  His  rejection  of  the  Jews  by  showing  that  this  is  due 
to  their  own  refusal  to  accept  the  Messiah,  and  that  it  is 
only  temporary.  Whatever  conclusions  respecting  indi- 
vidual election  may  be  drawn  from  these  chapters  must  be 
derived  from  it  by  way  of  inference,  for  it  is  not  directly 
concerned  with  individuals. 

The  deeper  Xew  Testament  view  begins  with  the  elec- 
tion of  the  Christ,  which,  as  we  have  seen,  was  predicted 
by  the  Old  Testament  prophets.  He  is  pre-eminently 
God's  elect.  He  receives  the  divine  call  and  the  assurance 
of  his  election  at  the  time  of  his  baptism  and  on  the 
Mount  of  Transfiguration  :  "  This  is  my  beloved  Son,  in 
whom  I  am  well  pleased  ; "  "  This  is  my  Son,  my  chosen  " 
(Matt,  iii,  17  ;  Luke  ix.  35).  But  his  election  is  not 
merely  to  earthly  service  in  the  kingdom,  tliough  that 
forms  a  part  of  it ;  he  is  chosen  to  be  the  eternal  King  of 
tlie  everlasting  kingdom.  Moreover,  his  election  does  not 
take  place  merely  in  time  ;  it  is  an  eternal  election  (Eph, 
iii.  11  ;  1  Pet.  i.  20).  The  election  of  believers  corre- 
sponds to  that  of  Christ  and  the  eternal  salvation  i-evealed 
through  him.  They  are  indeed  often  called  elect  in  a  way 
that  throws  no  light  upon  the  nature  of  their  election, 
but  designates  them  merely  as  members  of  the  chui-ch  of 
Christ,  which  is  tlie  true  "  Israel  of  God"  (Gal.  vi.  16), 
the  Chosen  People  of  the  Eew  Dispensation,  which  has 
entered  into  the  heritage  of  Israel's  blessings.  In  a  simi- 
lar way  they  are  called  the  "  saints  "  or  the  "  called."  But 
we  do  not  have  to  look  far  to  discover  that  in  many  places 


428  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

in  the  New  Testament  the  name  "  elect "  has  a  far  deeper 
meaning.  In  the  first  place,  the  election  is  derived  from 
the  eternal  purpose  of  God  ;  it  is  the  ]-esult  of  his  pre- 
destination or  foreordination.  In  the  second  place,  it  is 
an  election  to  all  the  privileges  and  blessings  of  i-edemp- 
tion,  especially  to  the  final  blessedness.  In  that  wonder- 
ful passage  in  Ephesians  (i.  3-6)  Paul  represents  believ- 
ers as  "  chosen  in  Christ  before  the  foundation  of  the 
world,"  as  "  foreordained  unto  adoption  as  sons,  according 
to  the  good  pleasure  of  God's  will,"  as  "foreordained 
according  to  the  purpose  of  him  who  worketh  all  things 
after  the  counsel  of  his  will." 

The  object  of  the  election  is  said  to  be,  "  that  we 
should  be  holy  and  without  blemish  before  him  in  love," 
that  we  should  attain  the  "  adoption  of  sons,"  that  "  we 
should  be  unto  the  praise  of  his  glory,"  that  we  should 
receive  the  "inheritance"  of  redemption  (Ephesians  i. 
3-14).  In  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  (viii.  28-30)  Paul 
traces  in  glowing  language  from  the  eternal  purpose  to 
the  eternal  glory.  "For  whom  he  foreknew  he  also  fore- 
ordained to  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son,  that 
he  might  be  the  firstborn  among  many  brethren  :  and 
whom  he  foreordained,  them  he  also  called :  and  whom 
he  called,  them  he  also  justified  :  and  whom  he  justified, 
tliem  lie  also  glorified."  Xotice  that  here  also  the  end  is 
I'epresented  as  sonship  in  God's  kingdom.  Peter  speaks 
of  believers  as  "elect  .  .  ,  according  to  the  fore- 
knowledge of  God  the  Father,  in  sanctification  of  the 
Spirit,  unto  obedience  and  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of 
Jesus  Christ"  (1  Pet.  i.  2).  The  foreknowledge  referred 
to  in  this  passage  and  in  Pom.  viii.  28,  may  be  that  om- 
niscience of  God  whicli  we  must  think  of  as  preceding 
His  decree,  and  wliich  is  to  be  distinguished  from  Ilis 
foreknowledge  in  the  theological  sense  of  the  term  ;  but  it 
is  more  likely  that  it  is  the  foreknowledge  of  the  divine 
appropriation  of  the  objects  of  His  love  and  practically 


ELECTION   AND   PKEDESTINATIUN  429 

the  same  as  His  foreordi nation.  The  latter  view  is  taken 
by  many  even  of  those  theologians  who  deny  the  Calvin- 
istic  doctrine  of  predestination.  Luke  speaks  of  believers 
as  "  ordained  to  eternal  life  "  (Acts  xiii.  48). 

With  reu'ard  to  these  New  Testament  teachino;s  re- 
specting  election  and  predestination,  four  things  are  to  be 
said.  In  the  first  place,  the  doctrine  is  always  taught  with 
a  practical  purpose,  namely,  to  strengthen  God's  people 
in  their  confidence,  in  the  midst  of  the  trials  and  difficul- 
ties of  the  Christian  life.  The  motive  is  well  brought  out 
in  the  eighth  chapter  of  Romans  (vv.  33,  34,  38,  39)  : 
"  Who  shall  lay  anything  to  the  charge  of  God's  elect  ? 
It  is  God  that  justifieth  :  who  is  he  that  shall  condemn  ? 
.  .  .  I  am  persuaded  that  neither  death,  nor  life,  nor 
angels,  nor  principalities,  nor  things  present,  nor  things  to 
come,  nor  height,  nor  depth,  nor  any  other  creature,  shall 
be  able  to  separate  us  from  the  love  of  God,  which  is  in 
Christ  Jesus  our  Lord."  Secondly,  the  same  books  of  the 
New  Testament  which  emphasize  predestination  most 
strongly  teach  the  universal  purpose  of  the  provision  for 
salvation.  Thirdly,  these  same  books  lay  the  greatest 
stress  upon  the  necessity  of  personal  faith  in  order  to  jus- 
tification and  salvation.  This  is  pre-eminently  the  case 
with  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  But  faith  is  man's  own 
free  act.  Fourthly,  and  finally,  while  the  doctrine  of 
election  implies  that  the  rest  of  mankind  are  excluded 
fr6m  salvation,  the  New  Testament  always  represents  the 
ground  of  their  exclusion  to  be  their  own  sin  freely  com- 
mitted. 

II.  We  come  now  to  the  great  historical  forms  which 
this  doctrine  has  assumed.  They  stand  like  sentries  bar- 
ring our  way  as  we  attempt  to  advance,  and  we  can  reach 
no  satisfactory  understanding  of  this  difiicult  subject  un- 
til we  have  reckoned  with  them. 

The  most  famous  form  of  the  doctrine,  and  the  one 
which  on  the  whole  has  exerted  the   greatest   influence 


430  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

upon  the  practice  and  the  theology  of  the  church,  is  that 
which  is  associated  with  the  names  of  tlie  two  men  who 
stand,  in  many  respects,  foi-emost  in  the  ranivs  of  Christian 
theologians,  Augustin  and  Calvin.  According  to  this 
view,  God  from  all  eternity  determined  to  permit  Adam 
to  fall,  and  that  in  consequence  all  his  descendants  shuuld 
come  into  the  world  condennied  to  eternal  punishment  on 
account  of  his  sin  and  totally  unable  to  save  themselves. 
Out  of  this  mass  of  fallen  and  helpless  men  lie  deter- 
mined also,  from  all  eternity,  to  choose  a  certain  number 
and  appoint  them  unto  eternal  life,  providing  for  them 
salvation  through  Jesus  Christ.  This  election  or  predesti- 
nation was  arbitrary,  in  tlie  sense  that  it  was  not  occa- 
sioned by  anything  outside  of  the  divine  will.  God  was 
not  moved  to  it  by  any  foresight  of  faith  and  obedience 
in  the  elect.  His  decree  of  election  was  wholly  uncondi- 
tioned. All  that  the  elect  have  God  gives  them,  lie 
provides  the  Saviour.  He  enters  their  souls  with  irresist- 
ible grace,  and  works  faith  and  repentance  in  them.  He 
justifies,  sanctifies,  and  saves  tliem.  From  first  to  last  all 
is  of  God.  The  believer's  will  becomes  free  only  when 
God's  irresistible  grace  has  made  it  free,  and  then  it  is 
free  only  for  the  good.  The  rest  of  mankind  aie  not 
elected  to  destruction,  but  simply  left  in  their  sin  and 
helplessness.  God  does  indeed  by  a  decree  of  reprobation 
assign  them  to  eternal  punishment,  but  their  sin  for  which 
they  are  punished  is  their  own,  and  not  the  result  of  the 
divine  decree.  More  commonly  those  who  hold  the  doc- 
trine prefer  to  speak  of  preterition  rather  than  reproba- 
tion. God  simply  passes  by  the  non-elect  and  leaves  them 
to  the  just  consequences  of  their  sins. 

No  one  who  is  acquainted  with  the  history  of  the  Au- 
gustin ian  or  Calvinistic  theolog)',  and  knows  how  great  an 
influence  for  good  it  has  had  upon  the  cliurch  of  Christ, 
will  speak  of  the  doctrine  which  has  just  been  given 
merely  in  the  language  of  disparagement.     Calvinisu]  has 


ELECTION   AND   PREDESTINATION  431 

had  one  great  and  most  praise  worthy  object,  to  exalt  God. 
It  has  aimed  to  biing  men  to  the  realization  of  their  utter 
dependence  upon  God  for  all  things  here  and  hereafter. 
Believers  owe  their  faith  not  to  themselves  or  anything  in 
them,  but  to  God  alone,  working  through  Christ  and  the 
Holy  Spirit.  The  practical  effect  of  this  doctrine  has 
been  to  make  strong  Cliristians.  The  men  wlio  had  come 
to  believe  that  they  were  nothing  and  God  everything, 
and  yet  that  God  was  working  in  them  and  through  them, 
could  do  their  work  in  the  world,  since  God  gave  it  to 
them  to  do,  without  fear  of  men  or  the  devil.  The  Prot- 
estants of  Geneva,  the  Huguenots  of  France,  the  Cove- 
nanters of  Scotland,  the  Puritans  of  the  English  Civil  War, 
and  our  own  Pilgrim  Fathers,  got  the  iron  in  their  blood 
from  their  Calvinism,  But  there  is  another  side  to  this 
doctrine.  It  reduces  human  freedom  to  a  mere  name,  so 
far  as  spiritual  things  are  concerned.  Faith,  instead  of 
being  the  free  personal  surrender  of  man's  will  to  God  is 
a  divine  act,  wrought  in  the  soul  by  overmastering  power. 
Moreover,  the  doctrine  throws  a  baleful  light  upon  the  di- 
vine righteousness.  The  non-elect  never  have  the  oppor- 
tunity for  salvation.  It  is  to  no  purpose  to  say  that  they 
are  justly  condemned  for  their  sins ;  for  the  sin  is  not  really 
theirs  but  Adam's,  and  they  are  condemned  for  that  which 
thej'  have  absolutely  no  power  to  help.  If  the  arrange- 
ment by  which  Adam  stood  probation  for  the  race  was  of 
God's  appointment,  then  the  sin  and  guilt  and  misei-y 
which  resulted  to  the  race  were  also  of  His  appointment. 
Undoubtedly  many  who  profess  to  hold  the  genuine  Cal- 
vinistic  doctrine  find  some  way  to  evade  its  ethical  diffi- 
culties at  the  expense  of  their  logic.  But  the  doctrine 
itself  is  open  to  insuperable  objection.  It  stands  the  test 
neither  of  Scripture  nor  of  reason. 

The  most  important  rival  theory  bears  the  name  of  tlie 
Dutch  theologian  Arminius,  but  it  was  known  long  befoi'e 
his  day,  and  is  now  held  by  multitudes  who  do  not  call 


432  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

theuiselves  Arniiniaus.  The  doctrine  lias  been  presented 
in  two  forms,  which  are  at  bottom  the  same.  According 
to  the  first  form  God's  decree  of  predestination  or  election 
concerns  the  class  of  believers.  God  from  eternity  deter- 
mined to  save  all  who  believe  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
and  to  condenm  all  who  reject  llis  grace.  But  when  the 
Arminians  are  pressed  to  explain  the  relation  in  which  in- 
dividuals stand  to  the  divine  plan,  they  state  the  doctrine 
in  a  second  form  :  God  from  eternity  determined  to  save 
those  individuals  whom  lie  foreknew  would  exercise  faith 
and  obedience,  or  the  divine  decree,  so  far  as  it  relates  to 
the  destiny  of  individuals,  is  conditioned  upon  the  foi'e- 
knowledge. 

One  cannot  but  feel  respect  for  the  moral  earnestness  of 
Arminianism.  If  human  responsibility  is  to  be  maintained 
and  the  divine  righteousness  vindicated,  the  I'eality  of  hu- 
man freedom  must  be  admitted.  Only  upon  this  con- 
dition can  the  Gospel  be  offered  freely  to  men,  and  the  call 
be  given  to  all  who  will  to  drink  the  water  of  life.  Be- 
tween a  theory  of  election  which  shuts  a  large  fraction  of 
mankind  helplessly,  and  irremediably  out  from  salvation, 
and  the  Arminianism  which  opens  wide  the  gates  of 
Christ's  redemption  to  all  who  will  enter,  whether  Chris- 
tian or  Jew  or  heathen,  it  seems  as  if  there  could  be  no 
question  what  our  choice  should  be.  Still,  when  all  is  said, 
Arminianism  also  has  its  difficulties.  Its  weakness  lies  in 
the  direction  of  the  strength  of  Calvinism.  It  lays  the  eni- 
])hasis  too  strongly  upon  the  human  factor  in  conversion 
and  the  Christian  life.  It  does  not  bring  into  sufficient 
prominence  the  believer's  dependence  upon  God.  It  is 
commonly  connected  with  a  doctrine  of  possible  sinless  per- 
fection, which  does  harm  by  lowering  the  standard  of  the 
divine  law  to  the  level  of  human  infirmity.  Arminianism, 
likewise,  fails  to  justify  itself  philosophically.  To  say  that 
the  divine  decree  of  predestination  is  based  upon  the  di- 
vine foreknowledge  is  to  state  the  matter  altogether  super- 


ELECTION    AND   PEEDESTI NATION  433 

ficially.  How  could  God  have  any  foreknowledge  until 
lie  had  formed  His  plan  ?  If  He  foreknew  that  certain 
men  would  accept  His  grace  if  it  was  offered  to  them,  and 
that  certain  others  would  reject  it,  and  then  decreed  to 
create  them  and  to  put  them  in  the  circumstances  in  which 
He  foresaw  they  would  make  these  choices,  then  there 
must  have  been  some  real  sense  in  which  He  foreordained 
these  acts  and  their  consequences.  So  strongly  have  some 
of  the  more  thoughtful  advocates  of  this  theory  felt  the 
embarrassment  of  their  position  that  they  have  withdrawn 
to  the  position  that  God  pi-edestinates  only  the  class  of  be- 
lievers, and  have  denied  His  foreknowledge  with  respect 
to  the  choices  of  individuals,  thus  maintaining  their  doc- 
trine at  the  expense  of  the  divine  absoluteness, 

HI.  The  question  therefore  arises,  Is  it  possible  to 
formulate  a  consistent  doctrine  of  predestination,  which 
shall  combine  the  elements  of  truth  to  be  found  in  both 
the  great  theories  and  avoid  the  mistakes  of  both,  a  doc- 
trine which  shall  be  Calvinistic  in  its  assertion  of  the  di- 
vine sovereignty  and  yet  do  justice  to  real  truth  to  which 
Arininianism  bears  witness  ?  I  think  it  is  possible.  As 
Professor  Fisher  has  well  said,  "  It  is  a  growing  convic- 
tion of  students  of  Scripture  and  of  philosophy  that,  on  the 
subject  before  us,  there  is  more  than  one  hemisphere  of 
truth.  That  which  both  the  Calvinist  and  Arminian 
chiefly  prized  was  truth,  not  error.  What  each  contended 
against  was  the  supposed  implications  of  a  proposition 
which  was  valued  by  his  opponent  from  its  relation  to  a 
set  of  implications  of  a  very  different  sort.  Eacli  con- 
nected with  his  antagonist's  thesis  inferences  which  that 
antagonist  repudiated"  {North  American  Review,  vol. 
cxxviii.,  p.  303).  In  order  to  state  the  true  view,  we  must 
go  back  to  the  doctrine  of  the  divine  plan.  When  study- 
ing that  subject  we  found  abundant  reason  for  the  as- 
sumption that  God's  eternal  purpose  extends  to  all  things 

in  time — in  other  words,  that  He  has,  to  use  the  language 
38 


434  PKESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

of  the  Assembly's  Catechism,  "  foreordained  wliatsoever 
comes  to  })ass."  But  if  this  be  so,  the  final  destiny  of  men, 
with  all  the  events  which  lead  up  to  it,  must  be  included 
in  the  divine  plan.  To  omit  this  great  class  of  events 
from  God's  decree,  would  be  to  leave  it  imperfect  and 
to  make  God  finite  instead  of  infinite.  Whatever  takes 
place  in  time  was  decreed  in  eternit}'.  If  a  portion  of  the 
race  are  saved  and  the  rest  lost,  it  must  be  because  God 
meant  that  it  should  be  so.  Predestination  is  only  a 
special  case  under  the  general  principle  of  the  divine  plan. 
It  cannot  be  denied  by  any  one  who  admits  the  omni- 
science and  the  omnipotence  of  God. 

Let  us,  however,  make  the  same  qualifications  which  we 
made  when  considering  the  eternal  plan  of  God.  In  the 
first  place,  there  is  nothing  in  this  view  inconsistent  with 
human  freedom.  God  himself  established  that  freedom, 
and  made  it  a  reality.  His  plan  did  not  tui'n  it  into  a 
mere  illusion,  but  simply  forestalled  it  and  gave  it  the 
conditions  for  its  exercise.  By  His  omniscience  God 
knew  all  the  possible  free  choices  of  all  possible  njen 
under  all  the  possible  circumstances  in  which  they 
might  be  placed.  In  forming  the  plan  which  He  adopted, 
He  took  up  all  the  free  choices  which  men  have  made, 
and  made  them  constituent  elements  of  His  purpose, 
thereby  turning  them  from  possibilities  into  certainties, 
yet  in  such  a  way  as  to  leave  them  in  the  fullest  sense 
free.  Only  when  the  decree  is  formed  can  we  speak  of 
foreknowledge,  which  has  to  do  not  with  possibilities  but 
with  realities.  Now  under  this  decree  men  act  with  per- 
fect freedom.  Some  accept  God's  grace  ;  others  reject  it ; 
but  both  classes  are  in  the  truest  sense  free. 

But,  in  the  second  place,  we  nnist  take  into  account  the 
distinction  between  the  efficient  and  the  permissive  decree 
of  God.  He  does  not  stand  in  the  same  relation  to  good 
and  to  evil.  The  good  has  its  source  in  Him,  and  He 
seeks  by  every  means  to  ])romote  it.     The  evil  He  hates 


ELECTION   AND   PREDESTINATION  435 

and  turns  from  ;  He  has  no  shai'C  at  all  in  it ;  the  most 
He  does  is  not  to  prevent  it.  It  is  therefore  only  in  ref- 
erence to  the  predestination  of  believers  that  we  can  speak 
of  an  efficient  decree  on  God's  part.  In  the  case  of  those 
who  reject  God's  grace  the  decree  is  permissive  only,  ex- 
cept in  so  far  as  their  punishment  is  concerned.  Kow 
while  it  is  true  that  the  believer's  faith  is  a  free  choice, 
yet  in  all  that  precedes  it  and  all  that  follows  it,  God's 
efficiency  is  concerned,  while  even  the  faith  itself  is  di- 
vinely caused  in  so  far  as  God  supplies  the  conditions 
without  which  the  free  choice  would  be  impossible. 
Christ,  the  Holy  Spirit,  forgiveness,  the  new  heart,  the 
new  life,  sanctification,  perseverance,  the  final  glory,  are 
all  gifts  of  God's  grace.  Granting,  as  we  must,  that  God 
has  taken  the  believer's  faith  up  into  His  plan  as  a  con- 
stituent element,  and  granting  that  it  is  an  indispensable 
element,  still  it  is  altogether  insignificant  when  compared 
with  the  blessings  which  God  bestows.  It  is  in  no  respect 
the  ground  of  the  divine  election ;  that  is  the  pure  un- 
merited grace  of  God.  Faith,  as  we  shall  see  when  we 
come  to  study  the  subject  more  carefully,  is  a  receptivity 
rather  than  a  causality.  It  is  like  the  willingness  of  the 
man  in  peril  to  let  himself  be  rescued  —  a  willingness 
which  is  indeed  indispensable,  but  in  no  way  the  cause  of 
his  deliverance.  But  God's  relation  to  the  sinner  is  very 
different.  His  sin  is  of  his  own  making.  His  abuse  of 
freedom  separates  him  from  God  and  brings  the  divine 
wrath  upon  him.  If  he  perseveres  in  his  sin  in  spite  of 
the  divine  grace  and  forbearance,  the  most  that  God  does 
is  to  let  him  go  on  in  his  evil  ways  and  to  inflict  upon 
him  the  punishment  which  he  has  drawn  upon  himself. 
While  therefore  we  use  the  terms  election  and  predestina- 
tion in  their  full  meaning  when  speaking  of  believers,  we 
do  not  use  them  with  reference  to  those  who  are  lost,  nor 
does  the  Scripture  do  so.  The  latter  class  do  iudeed  come 
into  the  scope  of  the  divine  plan,  and  we  can  speak  of 


436  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

their  sin  as  permissively  foreordained,  but  that  is  all. 
Theologians  sometimes  designate  the  divine  decree,  so  far 
as  it  relates  to  this  class,  as  a  decree  of  reprobation ;  but 
the  term  applies  not  to  that  part  of  the  decree  which  has 
to  do  with  their  sin,  but  only  with  the  part  which  relates 
to  their  final  punishment. 

These  two  qualifications,  derived  from  the  general  prin- 
ciples of  the  divine  plan,  serve  to  remove  some  of  the 
chief  difiiculties  in  the  way  of  the  doctrine  before  us. 
But  there  is  still  another  point  to  which  reference  must 
be  made.  The  divine  decree  of  predestination  or  election 
is  not  inconsistent  with  the  universal  intent  of  Christ's 
work  and  the  full  and  free  offer  of  the  Gospel  based  upon 
it.  The  same  plan  which  foreordains  all  the  events  con- 
nected with  human  probation  and  destin}'  foreordains  the 
Saviour's  work  of  salvation  as  a  provision  for  the  salva- 
tion of  all  men.  God  willeth  that  all  men  should  be  saved 
and  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth,  and  makes  the 
honest  offer  of  His  grace  to  all  men  ;  nay,  more,  we  have 
reason  to  believe  that  He  presses  His  grace  home  upon 
every  soul  and  ceases  only  to  urge  it  when  men  in  their 
freedom  utterly  refuse  to  accept  it.  Now  the  fact  that 
God's  plan  also  includes  the  certainty  of  the  result  in  the 
case  of  each  individual  does  not  make  the  universality  of 
redemption  less  a  reality.  We  need  not  have  recourse,  in 
order  to  explain  the  apparent  contradiction,  to  the  old 
distinction  between  the  secret  and  the  revealed  will  of 
God,  though,  rightly  understood,  it  has  its  value.  God's 
plan  does  not  tui-n  His  providence  in  grace  and  redemp- 
tion into  a  mere  mechanism,  nor  does  it  make  human  free- 
dom an  illusion.  The  certainty  it  produces  is  a  certainty 
for  God  alone,  and  not  for  men  ;  it  is  no  necessity.  Un- 
less we  are  to  bring  the  universe  to  a  deadlock,  we  must 
admit  that  the  divine  plan  in  no  way  interferes  with  the 
divine  grace  and  human  freedom.  No  man  is  ever  pi-e- 
vented  from  accepting  Jesus  Christ  freely  offered  to  him 


ELECTIOiS'   AND   PREDESTIlSrATION"  487 

in  tlie  Gospel  by  anything  in  the  foreordaining  purpose 
of  God  ;  all  that  will  ever  prevent  him  is  his  own  free 
choice.  Therefore  God  in  perfect  sincerity  offers  him 
His  grace  in  Christ.  I  admit  that,  when  all  is  said,  there 
is  a  difficulty  left.  But  it  is  only  the  old  difficulty,  which 
meets  us  outside  of  religion  as  truly  as  in  it,  the  difficult}^ 
of  bringing  together  in  our  thought  God's  infinitude  and 
our  freedom.  It  is  a  difficulty  which  is  inherent  in  our 
finite  minds  when  dealing  with  this  transcendent  subject. 
We  do  not  let  it  trouble  us  at  all  in  practical  matters. 
There  is  no  more  need  that  we  should  do  so  in  our  theo- 
logical investigations. 

Our  doctrine  of  election  and  predestination  is,  then, 
briefly  stated,  as  follows :  God  by  His  eternal  decree  has 
predestinated  believers  to  eternal  life,  not  on  the  ground 
of  their  foreseen  faith,  yet  not  without  the  knowledge  of 
their  faith  on  the  ground  of  the  Saviour's  work  as  a 
matter  of  pure  unmerited  grace ;  and  this  predestina- 
tion is  such  as  to  leave  human  freedom  intact  and  to  be 
wholly  consistent  with  the  universal  scope  of  Christ's  re- 
demptive work  and  the  universal  offer  of  the  Gospel. 
Election  does  not  have  regard  merely  to  men  as  fallen, 
but  to  all  the  circumstances  of  men,  the  Fall  included. 
This  is  not  the  doctrine  of  the  older  Calvinism,  yet  it 
may  be  called  Calvinistic  as  asserting  all  the  essential 
truth  of  Calvinism  in  its  historical  opposition  to  Armin- 
ianism. 

lY.  It  cannot  be  denied  that  the  doctrine  of  predes- 
tination is  to  many  minds,  both  in  the  church  and  out 
of  it,  a  stumbling-block.  It  involves,  as  we  have  seen, 
some  deep  metaphysical  problems,  and  can  only  with 
difficulty  be  so  stated  as  to  be  intelligible.  Is  it,  then, 
worth  while  to  give  it  a  place  in  the  system  of  Chris- 
tian doctrine?  Many  Christians  would  pass  it  by  alto- 
gether and  concentrate  Christian  thought  upon  subjects 
more  practically  important,  or  that  they  think  more  im- 


438  PRESENT   PAY   TTTEOLOOY 

portant.  Milton,  who  favored  Arminianism,  witli  a  satire 
which  was  as  exquisite  as  it  was  unfair,  turned  tlie  subject 
over  to  tlie  fallen  angels  in  hell,  and  has  told  us  in  his  im- 
mortal poem  ("Paradise  Lost,"  Bk.  ii.,  lines  555  seq.)how 

"  Otliers  apart  sat  on  a  lull  retired, 

111  thoughts  more  elevate,  and  reasoned  high 
Of  providence,  foreknowledge,  will,  and  fate, 
Fixed  fate,  free  will,  foreknowledge  absolute, 
And  found  no  end,  in  wandering  mazes  lost." 

No  wonder  he  sums  up  the  whole  matter  with  the  excla- 
mation, "Vain  wisdom  all,  and  false  philosoph}'!  "  But 
in  spite  of  Milton's  opinion  and  that  of  jnany  Cliristian 
thinkers  more  eminent  as  theologians  than  lie,  I  can- 
not think  that  we  should  treat  this  doctrine  thus.  It  is 
not  a  mere  conclusion  of  philosophy,  but  a  doctrine 
plainly  and  abundantly  taught  in  the  Scripture.  What 
we  need  to  do  is  not  to  discard  it,  but  to  use  it 
in  the  same  practical  way  in  whicli  it  is  employed  in 
the  Bible.  It  is  not  a  doctrine  over  wliich  the  church  of 
Christ  can  afford  to  become  embroiled  in  theological  con- 
troversy, but  one  to  be  used  for  the  edifying  and  strength- 
ening of  the  church  and  the  individual.  As  regards  the 
philosophical  problems  involved,  there  ought  to  be  a  large 
and  generous  toleration.  All  men  will  not  think  alike  on 
such  points.  Immense  harm  has  been  done  in  the  clnirch 
by  ill-advised  and  bitter  controversies  upon  the  speculative 
questions  connected  with  this  subject.  One  cannot  but 
think  tliat  the  Apostle  Peter  had  this  abuse  of  the  doc- 
trine in  mind  when  he  said  of  Paul's  epistles — in  which 
this  doctrine  is  more  fully  presented  than  elsewhere  in 
the  New  Testament :  "  Wherein  are  some  things  liard  to 
be  understood,  which  the  ignorant  and  unsteadfast  wrest, 
as  they  do  also  the  other  scriptures,  unto  their  own  de- 
struction "  (2  Pet.  iii.  16). 

But  looking  at  the  subject  practically  the  case  is  very 


I 


ELECTION   AND   PREDESTINATIOlSr  4B9 

different.  We  need  the  strength  and  comfort  which  this 
doctrine  alone  can  give  us.  The  doctrine  of  election 
grounds  the  Christian  life  in  God,  It  gives  Ilini  the  ini- 
tiative in  the  work  of  grace.  It  places  the  believer  in  a 
position  of  entire  dependence  npon  Ilini.  It  makes  the 
Christian's  life,  to  use  the  expressive  phrase  of  Horace 
Bushnell,  "  a  plan  of  God."  The  whole  process  of  educa- 
tion and  sanctitication  by  which  the  child  of  God  is  pre- 
pared for  the  heavenly  blessedness  is  attributed  to  God. 
He  is  the  controlling  power  in  all  our  work  and  service. 
We  work  out  our  own  salvation  with  fear  and  trembling, 
but  it  is  God  who  worketh  in  us  both  to  will  and  to  do  of 
His  good  pleasure  (Phil.  ii.  12).  Our  faith  is  something 
real  and  personal,  but  it  has  no  merit  and  no  spiritual 
power  in  it.  Its  value  lies  in  the  fact  that  by  it  we  have 
been  linked  on  to  the  eternal  decree  of  God,  and  have  back 
of  us  and  around  us  the  infinite  power  of  the  infinite  God. 
He  will  see  us  through.  He  will  not  allow  one  of  the 
Saviour's  sheep  to  perish,  and  no  one  can  pluck  them  out 
of  His  hand.  The  Christian  who  grasps  these  facts,  who 
understands  his  absolute  helplessness  apart  from  God  and 
Christ,  and  his  unbounded  strength,  when  united  to  God 
through  Christ,  has  courage,  cheerf  nlness,  inspiration,  and 
power  in  his  work  for  God. 

Viewing  the  doctrine  in  this  practical  light,  we  may 
adopt  as  our  own  the  language  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles 
of  the  English  church  :  "  The  godly  consideration  of  Pre- 
destination, and  our  Election  in  Christ,  is  full  of  sw^eet, 
pleasant,  and  unspeakable  comfort  to  godly  persons,  and 
such  as  feel  in  themselves  the  working  of  the  Spirit  of 
Christ,  mortifying  the  works  of  the  flesh,  and  their  earth- 
ly members,  and  drawing  up  their  mind  to  high  and 
heavenly  things,  as  well  because  it  doth  greatly  establish 
and  confirm  their  faith  of  eternal  Salvation  to  be  enjoyed 
through  Christ,  as  because  it  doth  fervently  kindle  their 
love  towards  God." 


XXIV. 

JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH 

OuK  Saviour  likened  the  kingdom  of  heaven  to  "  a 
treasure  hidden  in  a  field,  which  a  man  found  and  hid  ; 
and  in  his  joy  lie  goeth  and  selleth  all  that  he  hath  and 
buyeth  that  field  "  (Matt.  xiii.  44).  The  parable  may  be 
applied  with  truth  to  the  doctrine  which  we  are  about  to 
consider,  and  which  is  so  essential  to  the  kingdom  of  God. 
More  than  once  in  the  history  of  the  church  jt  has  been 
the  precious  hidden  treasui'e  \vhich  God's  people  have 
prized  so  highly  that  they  have  been  willing  literally  to 
sell  all  that  they  had  for  its  possession  and  maintenance. 
So  it  was  in  the  days  of  Paul,  so  at  the  time  of  the  Prot- 
estant Reformation.  Every  great  revival  of  spiritual  life 
in  the  Christian  church  has  been  preceded  or  accom- 
panied by  a  rediscover}^  of  this  truth  and  its  reinstate- 
ment in  its  ti-ne  place  in  the  Christian  system. 

This  doctrine  is  second  to  no  other  in  practical  impor- 
tance. It  is  concerned  with  questions  of  such  vital  mo- 
ment to  every  soul,  How  shall  the  sinner  be  reconciled 
with  God?  how  siiall  he  enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven? 
what  shall  he  do  that  he  may  inherit  eternal  life  ?  It 
tells  us  how  Christ's  redemptive  work,  and  especially  his 
atonement,  are  to  be  appropriated  by  sinful  men. 

We  shall  consider,  first,  justification  or  forgiveness,  and 
then  faith. 

I.  The  forgiveness  of  sins  is  as  trul)'  a  doctrine  of  the 
Old  Testament  as  of  the  New.  The  difference  between 
the  two  stages  of   revelation  does   not  consist   in    their 


.TITSTIFTCATIOlsr    BY    FAITIT  441 

teacliings  respecting  the  fact  of  forgiveness,  but  in  the 
light  thej  tlirow  upon  the  divine  basis  of  the  fact  and  the 
mode  in  which  forgiveness  is  to  be  ol)tained.  There  are 
no  declarations  in  the  Isew  Testament  of  God's  mercy  and 
willingness  to  forgive  stronger  than  some  of  those  to  be 
fonnd  in  the  Old.  Ln  the  midst  of  the  strict  requii-ements 
of  the  Ten  Commandments,  God,  while  visiting  the  iniq- 
uity of  the  fathers  upon  the  children,  upon  the  tliird  and 
fourth  generation  of  them  that  hate  Him,  is  said  to  sliow 
mercy  unto  a  thousand  generations  of  them  that  love  Him 
and  keep  His  commandments  (Ex.  xx.  5,  6).  When  Jeho- 
vah appeared  to  Moses  on  Sinai,  His  proclamation  was, 
"  Jehovah,  Jehovah,  a  God  full  of  compassion  and  gra- 
cious, slow  to  anger  and  plenteous  in  mercy  and  truth ; 
keeping  mercy  for  thousands,  forgiving  iniquity,  trans- 
gression, and  sin  ;  and  that  will  by  no  means  clear  the 
guilty  "  (Ex.  xxxiv.  6,  7).  The  sacrificial  system,  as  we 
saw  when  examining  the  doctrine  of  the  atonement,  was  a 
divine  means  for  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  reconciliation 
with  God,  although  the  offerings  of  atonement  were  in- 
trinsicall}'  inadequate  for  their  purpose  and  availed  only 
as  God  accepted  them  on  the  ground  of  the  perfect  sacri- 
fice, as  yet  only  vaguely  revealed.  Biit  wlien  men  asked 
what  they  should  do  with  regard  to  those  profounder  ele- 
ments of  sin,  for  which  the  sacrificial  system  made  no  pro- 
vision, the  only  reply  which  could  be  given  them  was 
that  they  should  repent,  return  to  their  obedience,  and 
trust  God's  forgiving  grace. 

It  is  only  when  we  come  to  tlie  New  Testament  that 
we  learn  on  what  the  divine  forgiveness  is  founded,  and 
by  what  means  it  is  to  be  secured.  The  Saviour  connected 
forgiveness'with  faith  in  himself,  proclaiming  that  "  the 
Son  of  man  hath  power  on  earth  to  forgive  sins"  (Matt. 
ix.  6).  By  the  wonderful  parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son  he 
taught  that  tlie  heavenly  Father  is  always  ready  to  forgive 
His  wandering  children.     Just  before  his  death,  in  con- 


442  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

nection  with  the  cstahlishincnt  of  that  sacred  rite  which 
was  to  coininemorate  liis  death  throughout  the  ages  of 
Christian  history,  he  declared  that  the  sacramental  cup 
symbolized  tlie  blood  of  the  covenant — that  is,  the 
Messiah's  covenant  predicted  by  the  prophets  (Jer.  xxxi. 
31-34) — "  which  is  shed  for  many  unto  remission  of  sins  " 
(Matt.  xxvi.  26-29). 

But  it  was  only  after  the  Saviour  had  died  and  ascended 
into  heaven,  that  the  full  truth  could  be  taught.  Then 
the  disciples  went  everywhere,  prochiiming  forgiveness  on 
the  ground  of  Christ's  sacrificial  death  to  all  who  would 
have  faith  in  him.  The  doctrine  is  presented  in  its  great 
evangelical  outlines  by  all  the  apostles,  but  by  none  with 
more  doctrinal  precision  and  force  of  argument  than  by 
Paul.  It  is  to  him  that  we  must  tui-n,  if  we  desire  to 
learn  the  full  meaning  of  the  doctrine  of  justification  by 
faith. 

There  are  difficulties  in  understanding  Paul.  They  are 
due  partly  to  the  inability  of  our  language  to  render  ex- 
actly the  Greek  words  which  are  the  technical  terms  in  the 
apostle's  discussions,  and  partly  to  the  differences  of  our  re- 
lioious  surroundings  and  modes  of  thought  from  those  of 
liis  day.  But  whoever  will  take  the  pains  to  overcome 
these  difficulties  and  attain  Paul's  point  of  view,  will  be  re- 
paid by  securing  the  clearest  and  most  far-reaching  insight 
into  the  system  of  Gospel  truth  which  the  New  Testa- 
ment affords.  Paul's  starting-point  was  the  question,  ITow 
shall  a  man  be  justified,  that  is,  become  right  with  God  ? 
how  shall  he  secure  the  righteousness  or  rightness  which 
will  render  him  acceptable  to  God  ?  The  prevalent  Jewish 
notion — a  notion  derived  from  the  later  teachings  of  the 
synagogue  and  not  to  be  fairly  inferred  from  the  teach- 
ings of  the  Old  Testament — was  that  good  works  justify. 
The  Jewish  teachers  argued  that  if  a  man  keep  the  law, 
he  thus  works  out  a  righteousness  which  secures  the  di- 
vine favor.    Now  Paul  did  not  deny  that  such  a  righteous- 


JUSTIFICATION   BY   FAITH  443 

iiess  by  the  Avorks  of  tlie  law  would  be  sufficient,  if  it  were 
actually  attained.  On  the  contrary,  he  declared  that  God 
will  "  render  to  every  man  according  to  his  works  ;  to 
them  that  by  patience  in  well-doing  seek  for  glory  and 
honor  and  incorrnption,  eternal  life  "  (E,om.  ii.  6,  7). 
But  Paul  denied  that  as  a  matter  of  fact  anj-  man  does  at- 
tain such  a  righteousness  by  w^orks.  In  the  two  epistles  in 
which  he  especially  discusses  the  subject  of  justification, 
namely,  those  to  the  Konians  and  the  Galatians,  he  de- 
clares that  all  men  are  sinners,  Jews  and  Gentiles  alike, 
and  so  are  nnable  to  become  right  with  God  on  the  ground 
of  their  good  works.  This  is  the  subject  of  the  first 
three  chapters  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  where,  after 
having  shown  by  the  most  cogent  evidence  that  both 
heathen  and  Jews  are  sinners,  he  sums  all  up  with  the 
declaration,  "  There  is  no  distinction ;  for  all  have  sinned, 
and  fall  short  of  the  glory  of  God  "  (iii.  23),  and  asserts 
that  "  by  the  works  of  the  law  shall  no  flesh  be  justified 
in  his  sight "  (iii,  20).  Similarly  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Galatians  he  affirms  that  "  no  man  is  justified  by  the  law 
in  the  sight  of  God  ;  "  "  for  as  many  as  are  of  the  works 
of  the  law  are  under  a  curse :  for  it  is  written  (Deut. 
xxvii.  26),  Cursed  is  every  one  whicli  continueth  not  in 
all  things  that  are  written  in  the  book  of  the  law,  to  do 
them  "  (Gal.  iii.  10,  11).  It  is  that  bondage  and  helpless- 
ness of  sinful  men,  to  which  reference  was  made  when  we 
were  examining  the  subject  of  sin.  So  far  as  God's  laws 
are  concerned,  all  men  are  bankrupts.  His  command- 
ment is  exceeding  broad,  and  when  we  come  to  under- 
stand it,  we  see  an  end  of  all  perfection  (Ps,  cxix.  96). 
Let  a  man  love  God  with  all  his  heart,  and  his  neighbor  as 
himself,  and  he  will  be  right  with  God,  but  alas,  who  even 
begins  to  do  it  ? 

Xow  what  can  be  done  under  these  circumstances  ?  If 
righteousness  by  works  is  impossible,  what  shall  take  its 
place  ?     While  men  are  separated  from  God  by  their  sins, 


444  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

tliey  cannot  take  tlie  first  steps  towai-d  ol)e(liencc  and  holi- 
ness. They  cannot  attain  their  cliief  end.  Is  there  no 
way  by  which  they  may  be  put  into  right  relations  with 
God  and  thus  enabled  to  become  what  God  would  have 
them  ?  It  is  liere  that  the  great  trnth  of  justification  by 
faith  comes  in  to  solve  the  problem.  It  is  God's  method 
of  setting  sinners  right  with  Himself,  in  order  that 
through  the  grace  of  Christ  and  the  IJoly  Spirit  He  may 
save  them  unto  the  uttermost.  The  right  relation  to  Him- 
self, which  nien  cannot  earn  by  their  good  woi'ks,  God 
gives  as  a  matter  of  grace  to  those  who  accept  it  by  faith. 
Instead  of  the  wholly  inadequate  self-wrought  righteous- 
ness which  is  of  no  avail,  there  is  revealed  in  the  Gospel 
"  a  righteousness  of  God  from  faith  unto  faith  "  (Rom.  i. 
17).  Tliis  idea  of  a  righteousness  bestowed  b}'  God's 
grace  M-as  not  wholly  new.  There  are  traces  of  it  in  Old 
Testament  prophecy.  But  the  Xew  Testament  righteous- 
ness of  God  is  new  in  being  clearlj-  based  upon  tlie  work 
of  Christ.  We  are  "justified  freel}'  by  liis  grace  through 
the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ  Jesus ;  whom  God  set 
forth  to  be  a  propitiation,  through  faith  by  his  blood,  to 
show  his  righteousness" — that  is,  God's  judicial  righteous- 
ness— "  because  of  the  passing  over  of  the  sins  done  afore- 
time, in  the  forbearance  of  God  ;  for  the  showing  of  his 
righteousness  at  this  present  season  :  that  he  might  him- 
self be  just,  and  the  Justifier  of  him  that  liath  faith  in 
Jesus"  (Rom.  iii.  24-26).  On  the  ground  of  what  Christ 
lias  done  through  liis  atoning  death,  God  bestows  upon 
the  sinner  in  pure  grace,  if  he  will  accept  it  by  faith,  the 
right  relation  with  Himself  which  the  sinner  cannot  attain 
in  his  own  strength  l)y  liis  own  works  ;  He  justifies  him, 
that  is,  sets  him  right.  The  sinner  is  forgiven.  He  be- 
comes a  child  of  God,  an  heir  of  heaven.  The  Father's 
smile  is  upon  him.  He  is  reconciled  with  God  and  lias 
peace  with  Him.  The  Spirit  bearcth  witness  with  his 
spirit  that  he  is  a  child  of  the  heavenly  Father.     God's 


JUSTIFICATION   BY   FAITH  445 

displousiire  is  removed.  In  a  word,  the  sinner  is  forgiven, 
and  this  not  in  the  merely  negative  sense  of  being  de- 
livered from  punishment,  but  in  the  positive  sense  of 
being  put  right  in  all  his  personal  relations  to  God.  In 
this  broad  sense  of  the  term  forgiveness  we  may  regard  it 
as  synonymous  with  justification.  The  righteousness  of 
God,  which  He  bestows  upon  all  who  receive  it,  is  essen- 
tially His  forgiving  grace. 

But  justification  is  not  an  end  in  itself;  it  is  only  a 
ineans  to  an  end,  and  that  the  chief  end  of  man,  his  com- 
plete redemption  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  It  brings  the 
sinner  into  the  kingdom  of  God,  but  the  kingdom  has 
still  to  come  in  its  fulness  in  his  soul.  To  be  justified  is 
not  the  same  as  to  be  saved.  But  justification  is  the  be- 
ginning of  salvation,  and  it  has  for  its  object  complete  sal- 
vation. The  student  of  Christian  truth  who  stops  short 
with  the  doctrine  of  justification  has  only  a  partial  and  in- 
adequate Gospel.  God  would  never  justify  a  man  if  He 
did  not  mean  to  save  him.  If  justification  by  the  works 
of  the  law  is  impossible,  it  does  not  follow  that  the  keep- 
ing of  the  law  is  impossible.  What  Paul  means  when  he 
says  that  we  are  not  under  the  law  but  under  grace  (Rom. 
vi.  15)  is  that  so  far  as  our  justification  with  God  is  con- 
cerned we  cannot  base  our  hopes  upon  the  works  of  the 
law,  our  trust  must  be  wholly  in  God's  forgiving  mercy. 
But  he  does  not  mean  that  we  are  not  to  obe^''  the  law  or 
that  we  are  under  no  obligation  to  obey  it.  On  the  con- 
trary, he  magnifies  the  law,  declaring  that  it  "is  holy,  and 
the  commandment  holy  and  righteous  and  good"  (Rom. 
vii.  12),  and  he  declares  that  the  object  of  God's  justify- 
ing grace  is  to  put  us  in  a  position  where  we  can  obey  the 
law  and  attain  our  chief  end.  JSTot  that  we  shall  ever  thus 
be  able  to  make  our  salvation  anything  but  a  matter  of 
grace,  but  that  along  the  track  of  grace,  through  the  help 
of  Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  we  may  attain  the  full 
salvation,  entii'e  holiness,  and  obedience  in  the  perfected 


446  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

kingdom  of  God.  Tlius  Paul  says  in  language  which  is  a 
key  to  the  whole  New  Testament  doctrine  of  grace, 
"  What  the  law  could  not  do,  in  that  it  was  weak  through 
the  flesh,  God,  sending  his  own  Son  in  the  likeness  of  sin- 
ful flesh,  and  for  sin,  condemned  sin  in  the  flesh  ;  that  the 
requirement  of  the  law  might  he  fulfilled  in  us,  who  walk 
not  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit "  (Rom,  viii.  3,  4). 
Justification  is  in  order  to  the  fulfilment  of  the  law  in 
God's  kingdom.  It  receives  its  whole  significance  from 
this  fact,  and  would  be  meaningless  apart  from  it.  In 
bestowing  His  justifying  grace,  the  righteousness  of  God, 
in  Paul's  meaning  of  the  term,  upon  us,  God  brings  us* 
into  such  a  relation  to  Himself  that  the  inward  righteous- 
ness, at  once  His  work  and  ours,  can  be  wrought  in  us. 
The  imputed  righteousness — to  use  the  familiar  phrase  of 
popular  tlieology — 'is  in  order  to  the  imparted  righteous- 
ness. 

This  is  the  answer  to  the  charge  of  immorality  so  often 
brought  against  the  doctrine  of  justification — a  charge  for 
wliich,  it  must  be  confessed,  some  ground  has  been  fur- 
nished by  the  loose  way  in  which  the  doctrine  has  often 
been  stated.  If  God  merely  forgave  the  sinner  and  left 
him  a  sinner,  we  could  not  vindicate  the  divine  conduct 
from  the  charge  of  unrighteousness.  In  that  case  justi- 
fication would  be  a  mere  indulgence  for  sin,  and  the 
question,  "  Shall  we  continue  in  sin  that  grace  may 
abound  ? "  to  which  Paul  replied  with  an  indignant  '"  God 
forbid  !  "  (Rom.  vi.  1,  2),  might  well  be  answered  in  the 
affirmative.  But  this  is  furthest  from  the  truth  of  the 
matter.  Justification  is  but  a  part  of  God's  great  work, 
and  significant  only  from  its  relation  to  the  whole.  As 
we  saw  when  considering  the  elements  in  Christ's  re- 
demption, the  priestlj'  work  cannot  be  separated  from  the 
kingly.  The  same  Saviour  who  has  secured  forgiveness 
through  his  death  is  })ledgcd  to  save  us  by  his  life.  We 
may  be  confident  of  this  very   thing,  that  he  which  be- 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH  447 

gan  a  good  work  in  iis  will  perfect  it  until  the  day  of 
Jesus  Christ  (Phil.  i.  6).  Moreover,  justification  is  not 
granted  to  every  sinner  indiscriminately,  but  only  to  those 
who  believe  on  Christ,  and  faith  is  such  an  act  of  the  hu- 
man will  as  implies  that  the  whole  set  of  the  sinner's  life, 
when  he  has  received  the  divine  forgiveness,  will  be 
against  sin  and  toward  holiness. 

But  while  I  emphasize  thus  strongly  the  relation  of 
justification  to  the  sanctification  and  complete  salvation  of 
the  sinner,  let  me  also  emphasize  the  clear  distinction  be- 
tween the  justification  and  the  sanctification,  between  the 
imputed  righteousness  and  the  imparted  or  inherent  right- 
eousness. The  two  are  not  the  same,  and  they  do  not 
run  into  each  other.  When  a  bone  is  broken,  it  must 
be  set  before  the  process  of  healing  can  begin,  and  the 
setting  is  in  order  that  the  fragments  may  knit  to- 
gether and  unite ;  but  the  setting  and  the  healing  are 
wholly  distinct.  Justification  is  the  setting  of  the  broken 
bone ;  it  brings  the  soul  into  its  true  relation  to  God  ;  it 
has  sanctification  for  its  object.  Sanctification  is  the 
healing,  a  process  wholly  different  and  wholly  distinct. 
Justification  is  God's  work ;  sanctification  is  the  united 
work  of  God  and  man.  This  is  the  point  of  controversy 
between  Roman  Catholics  and  Protestants.  The  former 
confuse  justification  and  sanctification.  According  to  the 
Canons  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  "  Justification  consists 
not  in  the  mere  remission  of  sins,  but  in  the  sanctification 
and  renewal  of  the  inner  man  by  the  voluntary  recep- 
tion of  God's  grace  and  gifts."  Accordingly,  justification 
is  progressive.  It  is  not  until  a  man's  faith  has  become 
manifested  in  good  works  that  he  is  justified.  But  Prot- 
estants claim  that  justification  is  complete  fi'om  the  first. 
The  father  of  the  parable  does  not  leave  his  prodigal  son 
outside  the  house  until  he  has  shown  his  repentance  by 
his  works ;  but  he  goes  forth  to  meet  him,  and  falls  upon 
his  neck  and  kisses  him,  and  has  the  best  robe  put  on 


448  PEESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

Iiiiu,  had  a  ring  on  his  finger,  and  shoes  on  his  feet,  and 
kills  for  him  the  fatted  calf.  The  sinner  is  not  taken 
back  into  the  divine  favor  by  degrees,  cautiously  and 
grudgingly ;  but  he  is  restored  to  all  his  privileges  as  a 
child  of  God.  This  is  the  only  way  to  make  the  work  of 
sanctification,  which  immediately  begins,  complete.  It  is 
a  work  which  can  go  forward  only  after  the  relation  of 
fatherhood  and  sonship  is  fully  re-established.  It  is  only 
by  such  love  that  the  sinner's  love  can  be  made  perfect. 
"  We  love  him  because  he  first  loved  us"  (1  John  iv.  19). 
Thus  only  can  that  joy  and  peace  and  cheerful  courage  which 
are  the  condition  of  the  Christian  life  be  realized.  Accord- 
ingly, our  Protestant  churches  have  jealously  guarded  this 
doctrine  of  a  complete  justification.  While  they  have 
defended  it  against  Iloman  Catholicism,  they  have  also 
maintained  it  against  those  Protestants  who  have  taught  a 
work  righteousness,  or  have  attempted  to  mingle  together 
justification  and  sanctification.  There  are  those  who  fear 
that  to  admit  the  fulness  and  freeness  of  the  divine  for- 
giveness will  lower  the  standard  of  morality  and  religion. 
But  generally  they  do  not  understand  the  true  meaning  of 
the  doctrine  of  justification  by  God's  free  grace.  And 
whether  they  understand  it  or  not,  they  greatly  mistake 
the  working  of  the  human  soul.  There  is  no  motive  so 
powerful  as  that  of  love  and  gratitude.  The  Christian 
who  realizes  what  God  has  done  for  him,  who  stands  in 
the  midst  of  the  divine  grace,  seeing  it  above  and  beneath 
and  on  every  side  of  him,  and  knowing  that  it  has  been 
given  him  entirely  apart  from  any  merit  of  his,  has  an 
impulse  and  a  motive  to  holiness  and  Christian  service 
compared  with  which  all  other  motives  are  feeble. 

11.  Our  subject  is  justification  by  faith.  We  have  con- 
sidered the  divine  element,  justification  ;  now  let  us  look 
at  the  human  element,  faith.  The  doctrine  of  faith  is 
one  of  large  relations.  Faith  docs  not  belong  to  the 
sphere  of  Chi-istianity  alone,  but  is  a  fact  of  the  univer- 


JUSTIFICATION   BY    FAITH  449 

sal  religious  life,  and  also  of  the  practical,  or,  as  we  often 
call  it,  secular  life.  It  is  one  of  the  fundamental  and  es- 
sential activities  of  our  human  nature.  Christianity  can 
lay  no  exclusive  claim  to  it ;  its  pre-eminency  lies  in  the 
fact  that  it  furnishes  faith  with  its  highest  exercise  and 
fullest  satisfaction.  We  need  not,  therefore,  go  to  the 
Bihle  merely  to  discover  the  nature  of  faith.  We  can 
get  our  information  directly  from  life. 

What  then  is  faith  ?  There  are  certain  inadequate  defi- 
nitions which  are  widely  maintained  and  which  have  pro- 
duced great  confusion.  I  will  refer  to  two  of  them.  The 
first,  which  has  perhaps  the  most  extensive  currency, 
makes  faith  an  assent  to  truth  upon  the  exhibition  of  ap- 
propriate evidence.  Now  all  faith  undoubtedly  is  accom- 
panied by  such  assent,  and  it  may  properly  be  called  an 
element  of  faith.  But  it  is  far  from  being  the  central  and 
essential  element.  There  may  be  such  an  assent  and  yet 
no  real  faith.  The  apostle  James  fitly  describes  the  faith 
that  goes  no  farther  than  assent:  "Thou  believest  that 
God  is  one ;  thou  does  well :  the  demons  also  believe,  and 
shudder"  (James  ii.  19).  The  demons  are  altogether 
orthodox  ;  they  give  their  assent  to  the  great  article  of 
the  Hebrew  creed  (Dent.  vi.  4),  but  it  leads  only  to  dread 
and  hatred,  not  to  faith.  In  all  ages  of  the  Christian 
church  there  has  been  this  faith  of  mere  assent,  while  all 
true  heart-faith  was  absent.  This  is  one  of  the  half- 
truths  which  often  work  more  mischief  than  whole  false- 
hoods. No  one  can  measure  the  harm  that  this  inade- 
quate notion  of  faith  has  worked,  and  is  still  working, 
among  Christians. 

The  second  imperfect  definition  to  which  I  referred  is 
that  which  owes  its  origin  to  the  description  of  faith  given 
by  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  in  that  won- 
derful chapter  in  which  is  presented  the  muster-roll  of  the 
heroes  of  faith  under  the  Old  Dispensation  :  "Now  faith 
is  the  assurance  of  things  hoped  for,  the  proving  of  things 
29 


450  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

not  seen  "  (Hob.  xi.  1).  There  is  not  the  slightest  evi- 
dence that  this  was  intended  for  a  scientific  definition  of 
faitli.  Rather  it  describes  it,  by  pointing  to  one  of  its 
prominent  cliaracteristics.  It  is  trne  tliat  faith  lias  to  do 
with  things  which  are  not  perceived  throngh  the  medium 
of  the  senses.  But  this  is  not  the  essential  element  of 
faith.  When  the  attempt  is  made  to  illustrate  the  nat- 
ure of  faith  by  the  example  of  the  scientist  who  has  to 
do  with  invisible  atoms  and  ethers  and  forces,  the  result 
is  a  very  pretty  comparison  between  faith  in  one  of  its 
less  essential  characteristics  and  the  methods  of  science, 
but  we  have  no  true  analog}^  and  no  real  light  thrown 
upon  the  nature  of  faith.  It  is  only  in  a  figure  of  speech 
that  we  can  call  the  scientist's  belief  in  the  invisible  ele- 
ments of  the  universe  faith.  In  order  to  turn  his  belief 
into  real  faith,  we  should  have  to  suppose  on  his  part  a 
recognition  of  the  Creator  of  the  univei'se,  which,  alas, 
in  many  of  our  scientists,  is  not  found.  So  in  the  spir- 
itual sphere,  we  may  have  ever  so  strong  a  conviction 
of  the  existence  of  an  unseen  world,  yea,  of  the  unseen 
God  and  Christ,  and  the  life  eternal,  and  yet  not  liave  real 
faith.  I  do  not  think  that  this  definition  has  done  so 
much  harm  as  the  other,  but  it  has  led  to  great  confusion 
of  thought  and  consequent  misunderstanding  of  funda- 
mental Christian  truth. 

What  is  faith  ?  The  answer  can  be  given  in  a  single 
word :  it  is  trust.  It  is  primarily  a  relation  of  one  person 
to  another.  We  cannot  have  faith  in  things  or  in  the 
truth,  unless  there  is  a  person  back  of  them,  who  is  the 
primary  object  of  our  faith.  Moreovei',  faith  implies  de- 
pendence on  the  one  side,  and  strength  and  ability  on  the 
other.  There  is  a  perso7i  who  relies,  and  a  pei'son  who  is 
relied  upon.  The  trust  implies  recejitivity  upon  the  side 
of  the  one  who  has  faith,  and  some  kind  of  communica- 
tion and  bestowal  on  the  part  of  the  one  in  whom  he  has 
faith.     To  these  particulars  we  may  add  the  further  one, 


-FUSTIFrCATION    BY    FAITH  451 

that  faith  is  an  activity'  of  the  whole  soul,  of  the  intellect, 
the  sensibility,  and  the  will.  There  is  an  intellectual  ele- 
ment in  it ;  in  order  to  trust  we  must  know  the  person 
whom  we  trust,  and  know  something  about  him.  This  is 
where  the  assent  to  truth  comes  in,  or  rather  begins  to 
come  in.  Then  there  is  an  element  of  feeling  in  faith  ; 
we  cannot  stand  in  this  relation  to  another  person  without 
experiencing  certain  emotions  respecting  him,  such  as 
love,  reverence,  admiration,  or  the  like.  Finally,  there  is 
an  element  of  will  in  faith,  and  this  is  the  distinctive  ele- 
ment. This  is  what  makes  faith  a  moral  activit3^  There 
is  choice  in  it.  We  may  exercise  it  or  abstain  from  it. 
There  is  always  in  true  faith  a  laying  of  our  will,  to  an 
extent  greater  or  less,  into  the  keeping  of  another  will. 
These  three  elements  are  not  always  present  in  the  same 
proportion.  Now  one  is  more  prominent,  now  another. 
But  always  in  its  deepest  essence  faith  is  a  matter  of  the 
will,  of  the  free  choice. 

The  simplest  illustration  of  faith  is  that  M'hich  comes 
to  us  from  childhood.  The  child  can  do  very  little  for 
itself.  Its  wants  are  supplied,  its  comforts  furnished,  its 
choices  made,  chiefly  by  others,  by  parents  and  friends. 
There  is  no  relation  in  which  there  is  greater  dependence 
on  the  one  side  and  more  abundant  bestowal  on  the  other. 
It  is  true  that  to  a  large  extent  the  trust  of  the  child  is  in- 
stinctive, and  that  it  is  not  a  matter  of  free  rational  choice 
as  yet  to  any  considerable  degree.  But  this  spontaneous 
trust,  so  beautiful  and  touching,  and  so  rarely  put  to 
shame,  is  not  only  a  type  of  the  higher  moral  trust,  which 
comes  with  the  development  of  the  power  of  choice  and 
the  moral  nature,  but  it  is  the  initial  exercise  of  the  free 
will  itself.  Small  though  the  element  of  freedom  may 
be,  doubtless  it  is  always  present.  And  what  could  be 
more  lovely  ?  Like  the  flowers  of  the  field,  which  neither 
toil  nor  spin,  these  children  in  their  childish  faith  do 
nothing,  yet  hold  themselves  open  to  receive  everything. 


452  PRESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

In  the  wider  spheres  of  life  fiiith  is  an  essential  activity 
of  human  nature.  Society  is  possible  only  as  men  trust 
one  another,  standing  in  relations  of  mutual  dependence 
and  receptivity.  Without  faith  business  would  languish 
and  come  to  an  end.  A  business  man's  credit,  the  trust 
which  he  is  able  to  inspire  in  other  men,  is  always  his 
best  capital.  In  how  many  hundreds  of  my  fellow-men 
must  I  have  faith  in  order  to  go  to  bed  at  night  with  the 
quiet  conlidence  that  my  to-morrow's  wants  will  be  pro- 
vided for!  How  do  I  know  that  my  correspondents  will 
fulfil  the  commissions  I  have  given  them,  and  the  post- 
ofiice  do  its  work,  and  railroads  and  steamboats  carry  the 
mails,  and  my  letters  come  to  me,  wuth  all  in  ni}'  business 
that  is  so  vitally  dependent  upon  them  ?  Faith,  trust — 
and  a  faith  and  trust  that  are  seldom  brought  to  con- 
fusion. 

We  come  to  a  higher  exercise  of  faith  when  we  enter 
the  sphere  of  religion,  but  it  is  the  same  in  kind.  The 
relation  is  not  between  man  and  man,  but  between  man 
and  God.  There  is,  however,  the  same  dependence  and 
need  on  the  one  side,  and  the  same  strength  and  bestowal 
on  the  other,  and  faith  here  also  is  trust,  an  act  of  the 
will,  a  putting  of  ourselves  into  an  attitude  of  receptivity 
that  what  we  need  nuiy  be  given  to  us.  And  this  is 
what  makes  the  dijEference  between  piet}'  and  irreligion, 
whether  among  heathens  or  Christians.  A  man  may 
have  altogether  inadequate  or  even  erroneous  views  of 
God,  and  yet  have  faith  in  the  god  or  gods  he  knows. 
The  idolater  who  bows  down  to  stocks  and  stones  may 
have  faith,  and  so  be  religious,  while  the  most  orthodox 
Christian  who  accepts  the  vpsissima  verha  of  the  West- 
minster Confession  may  have  none. 

As  I  said,  the  difference  between  Christian  faith  and 
the  faith  of  natural  religion  is  not  in  the  nature  of  this 
activity,  but  in  the  nature  of  its  object.  Christianity 
gives  faith  its  highest  exercise  and  its  truest  satisfaction  ; 


JITSTIFICATTOlSr   BY   FAITH  453 

tliercin  lies  the  peculiarity  of  Chvistian  faith.  It  is  an 
eye  which  is  made  to  see  ;  it  remains  the  same  eye,  so 
long  as  it  be  nsed,  whatever  it  may  see.  It  is  a  liand 
which  may  be  reached  out  for  any  gift,  but  it  remains  a 
liand  alike  when  a  stone  is  given  it  instead  of  bread,  and 
when  it  receives  the  ambrosia  of  the  gods.  Bnt  what  a 
blessed  thing  it  is  to  find  the  true  object  of  our  faith,  to 
see  with  onr  eye  and  to  grasp  with  our  hand  the  most 
precious  things  of  life !  Christian  faith  lays  hold  upon 
the  one  thing  needful.  It  is  a  trust  npon  the  true  God 
and  Jesus  Christ  His  Son.  It  receives  the  blessing  of 
God's  redemptive  grace. 

We  are  now  prepared  to  see  how  faith  justifies.  The 
faith  of  justification  is  the  sinner's  personal  trust  in  Jesus 
Christ  the  Saviour.  Moved  by  God's  Spirit,  attracted  by 
the  invitations  of  the  Gospel,  feeling  his  dependence  and 
need,  seeing  in  Christ  the  supply  of  all  his  wants,  he 
freely  puts  himself  into  the  Saviour's  hands  that  he  may 
be  justified  and  saved  hj  him,  giving  himself  to  God 
through  Christ.  This  trust  involves  a  self-abnegation,  a 
self-emptying,  a  turning  away  from  all  self-help,  an  utter 
rennnciation  of  all  reliance  npon  self-wrought  righteous- 
ness. It  is  an  act  of  will — free,  rational — made  in  view  of 
the  truth.  It  involves  the  highest  exercise  of  the  power 
of  choice,  for  it  is  concerned  with  the  chief  end  of  life. 
But  while  it  is  in  this  sense  an  activity  of  the  will,  it  is  a 
receptive  activity  ;  it  is  a  stretching  out  of  an  emptj^  hand 
to  receive  an  undeserved  gift.  Now  faith  justifies  because 
it  thus  opens  the  soul  to  the  grace  of  God  and  Christ.  It 
is  because  the  sinner  has  thus  put  himself  at  the  disposal 
of  Christ  for  time  and  for  eternity,  to  be  moulded  and 
shaped  by  him,  because  lie  has  given  np  all  trust  in  him- 
self and  thrown  himself  upon  Christ  in  entire  dependence, 
that  God  can  for  Christ's  sake  forgive  him  and  reinstate 
him  in  all  the  lost  privileges  of  sonship.  By  liis  faith  he 
is  united  to  Christ,  and  God  sees  him  not  as  he  is  in  him- 


454  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

self,  but  as  he  is  in  Clii-ist,  and  for  Christ's  sake  lie  for- 
gives him  and  begins  npon  tlie  work  of  sanctifying  him. 
The  sinner  in  cliildlike  trnst  has  cast  liimself  upon  God 
and  Christ,  and  he  has  leceived  from  tliem  the  riches  of 
forgiving  grace  and  the  assurance  of  sanctifying  grace. 
How  different  such  faith  as  this  is  from  tlie  acceptance  of 
a  system  of  doctrines  or  the  yielding  to  the  authority  of  a 
church!  How  immense  the  result!  Iloi-ace  Bushnell 
has  described  the  true  saving  faith  in  the  simplicity  of  the 
truth:  "Christian  faith,"  lie  says,  "is  the  faith  of  a 
transaction.  It  is  not  the  committing  of  one's  thought  in 
assent  to  any  proposition,  but  the  trusting  of  one's  being 
to  a  heing.  there  to  be  rested,  kept,  guided,  moulded, 
governed,  and  possessed  forever."  "  It  gives  you  God, 
fills  you  with  God  in  immediate,  experimental  knowledge, 
puts  you  in  possession  of  all  there  is  in  him,  and  allows 
you  to  be  invested  with  his  chai'acter  itself"  (Life  of 
Bushnell,  p.  192  seq.). 

We  can  thus  see  why  there  is  nothing  meritoiious  in 
faith.  It  is  indeed  a  good  work — the  best  woi'k  we  ever 
do  ;  it  is  a  work  in  all  realit}-.  But  it  has  no  merit. 
Faith  is  valuable  not  for  what  it  is  but  for  what  it  re- 
ceives. It  is  a  vessel  which  is  intrinsically  of  no  worth, 
but  only  for  what  it  contains.  It  is  a  hand  which  may 
receive  a  gift  but  can  give  none.  This  is  the  nature  of 
faith  always.  Some  people  have  the  notion  that  if  their 
faith  wci-e  only  strong  enough  or  intense  enough  they  could 
accomplish  anything  with  it;  they  regard  it  as  an  omnipo- 
tent power.  But  nothing  could  be  more  mistaken.  The 
power  is  all  of  God,  and  faith  is  only  the  medium  through 
which  it  is  I'eceived.  If  God  should  withhold  Ilis  gift 
faith  would  remain  poor  empty  faith.  It  does  not  follow 
that  because  in  the  days  of  Christ  and  the  apostles  mii'a- 
cles  were  wrought  through  the  instrumentality  of  faith, 
our  faith  in  these  days  of  God's  quieter  providential 
workinors  is  less  genuine.     It    was  not  the  faith    which 


JUSTIFICATION"   BY   FAITH  455 

wrought  the  miracles,  but  God  who  wrought  them  through 
the  fuith.  If  God  had  a  reason  for  miracles  then  which 
He  does  not  have  now,  it  does  not  follow  that  our  faith 
is  any  the  less  real.  The  empty  vessel  received  one  kind 
of  filling  then  ;  it  receives  another  kind  now.  That  is  all 
the  difference.  The  vessel  itself  may  be  as  good,  or  better 
— and  certainly  the  gifts  are  better  for  us.  No  amount  of 
faith  will  compel  God  to  give  what  He  does  not  regard  as 
best  for  us.  Faith  as  a  grain  of  mustard-seed  is  sufficient 
to  remove  mountains,  if  God  has  them  ready  for  us  to  re- 
move ;  and  faith  mountain-great  is  insufiicient  to  move  a 
mustard-seed,  if  God  deems  it  not  best  that  it  should  be 
moved.  Now  such  an  activity  as  this,  which  derives  all 
its  worth  from  what  it  receives,  can  have  no  merit.  It 
leaves  the  sinner  utterly  dependent  upon  God.  All  that 
he  has  he  has  received.  All  that  he  hopes  for  will  come 
to  him  of  pure  unmerited  grace.  There  is  no  merit  in  the 
fact  that  the  man  in  peril,  around  whom  a  rope  is  thrown, 
does  not  cast  it  off,  that  he  co-operates  with  those  who  are 
saving  him.  Yet  he  might  never  be  saved  unless  he  thus 
freely  gave  himself  up,  and  the  sinner  would  never  be 
saved  unless  he  had  faith.  Looking  at  it  meielj^  as  an  in- 
dispensable condition,  faith  has  a  very  considerable  impor- 
tance ;  "but  looking  at  it  in  relation  to  the  gift  of  God 
through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  it  is  as  nothing, 

I  have  spoken  here  particularly  of  the  first  act  of  faith, 
the  justifj'ing  faith  by  which  the  sinner  enters  the  king- 
dom of  God.  But  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  faith  is 
essential  all  through  the  Christian  life.  It  is  not  onlj'  the 
condition  of  justification,  but  also  of  sanctification.  The 
just  shall  live  by  faith.  All  God's  gifts  come  to  men 
through  its  medium.  It  enters  into  cliaracter,  for  it  in- 
volves a  permanent  choice  and  is  concerned  with  the 
supreme  choice  of  life.  At  the  first  it  is  an  act,  a  "  trans- 
action," as  Bushnell  called  it ;  but  it  becomes  a  perma- 
nent attitude  of  the  soul  toward  God  and  Jesus  Christ. 


450  PRESENT   PAY    THEOLOGY 

We  often  talk  as  if  faith  were  only  for  this  life.  But 
Paul  tells  us  that  faith,  like  love  and  hope,  abides  (1  Cor. 
xiii.  13).  It  will  not  be  "  changed  to  jight,"  as  we  some- 
times say,  but  when  the  time  of  higher  vision  comes,  faith 
will  merely  find  a  higher  exercise.  Through  all  eternity 
it  will  be  the  hand  which  will  receive  God's  largess.  We 
shall  never  reach  a  point  where  our  relation  to  God  and 
Christ  will  be  any  other  than  that  of  trust  and  depend- 
ence. 

Such  is  faith,  and  such  justification  by  faith.  Whoever 
understands  this  doctrine  understands  the  Gospel.  Wlio- 
ever  has  a  personal  faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  possesses  in  him 
wisdom  and  righteousness  and  sanctification  and  redemp- 
tion (1  Cor.  i.  30). 


XXV. 

THE  NEW  LIFE 

Let  ns  take  up  once  more  the  clew  which  has  guided  us 
through  all  our  wanderings  in  the  mazes  of  theology — the 
doctrine  of  God's  redemptive  kingdom.  The  kingdom  is 
the  chief  end  of  God's  plan  and  of  man's  existence.  The 
sinner's  misery  and  guilt  consist  in  the  fact  that  he  is  fall- 
ing short  of  his  chief  end,  since  by  his  sin  he  is  outside  of 
the  kingdom  and  unable  in  his  own  strength  to  re-enter  it. 
Christ  by  his  redemptive  work  has  provided  a  way  for  the 
sinner  to  become  once  more  a  member  of  the  kingdom 
and  attain  his  chief  end  in  it.  Through  the  divine  jus- 
tification or  forgiveness,  appropriated  by  faith,  he  is  ad- 
mitted to  the  kingdom  so  far  as  his  outward  relations  are 
concerned  ;  God's  grace  transforms  displeasure  into  favor 
and  restores  the  sinner  to  his  lost  sonship,  making  him 
an  heir  of  God  and  joint-heir  with  Christ.  But  justifica- 
tion, with  its  change  of  outward  relations,  is  only  a  means 
to  an  end,  namely,  to  the  attainment  of  the  chief  end,  the 
actual  redemption.  There  is  therefore  need  of  an  internal 
change,  a  transformation  of  the  spiritual  life,  an  actual 
achievement  of  sonship.  Amnesty  looks  forward  to  re- 
construction and  the  attainment  of  all  the  ends  of  citizen- 
ship. It  is  of  this  new  life,  .the  actual  realization  of  man's 
chief  end  in  the  soul  itself,  so  far  as  this  result  is  attained 
in  the  present  world,  that  I  wish  to  speak  at  this  time. 

I.  The  new  life  begins  in  that  great  spiritual  crisis 
which  we  call  the  change  of  heart.  This  is  a  revolution 
of  the  most  radical  character.     The  whole  bent  and  direc- 


458  PRESETTT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

tion  of  the  soul  is  changed.  As  we  have  seen,  tlie  sin- 
ner's supi'eme  choice  is  altogether  wrong.  He  makes  self 
and  the  world  his  chief  end.  lie  worships  and  serves  the 
creature  rather  than  the  Creator  (Rom.  i.  25).  lie  is  self- 
centered,  revolving  in  the  narrow  orbit  of  a  life  given 
wholly  to  finite  things.  In  the  change  of  heart  there  is 
a  complete  reversal  of  the  choice.  God  and  His  kingdom, 
man's  true  supreme  end,  are  chosen.  The  man's  life  is 
no  longer  self-centered,  but  God-centered.  The  narrow 
orbit  is  deserted  and  the  soul  enters  upon  the  career  of 
eternal  life.  Sin  is  no  longer  the  governing  principle,  for 
love  has  taken  its  place.  It  would  not  be  true  to  say  that 
the  change  of  lieai't  is  confined  to  the  will,  for  the  whole 
man  is  involved  in  it;  there  is  an  intellectual  transforma- 
tion and  a  transformation  of  the  sensibility.  But  the 
chano;e  beo-ins  in  the  will,  and  in  the  hio'hest  element  of 
the  will,  the  free  choice,  and  reaches  the  other  faculties  of 
the  man  as  it  moves  out  from  this  center.  The  heart,  ac- 
cording to  the  scriptural  meaning  of  the  term,  is  the  man 
himself,  the  inmost  core  and  kernel  of  personality  ;  it  is 
the  free  will.  The  heart  is  the  seat  of  character,  which 
oi'iginates  in  the  great  permanent  choices  of  the  soul. 
The  chancre  of  heart  is  the  befjinniuii;  of  a  new  character. 

o  or? 

The  greatness  and  radical  nature  of  this  change  cannot 
be  too  strongly  emphasized.  The  Bii)le  terms  which  are 
employed  to  describe  it  are  none  too  strong.  It  is  as  John 
declares  it  (John  i.  13),  a  new  birth  ;  a  birth  from  above, 
without  which  a  man  cannot  enter  the  kingdom  of  God 
(John  iii.  3-8).  It  is  a  new  creation  :  "  If  any  man  is  in 
Christ,  he  is  a  new  creature  ;  the  old  things  are  passed 
away  ;  behold,  they  are  become  new"  (2  Cor.  v.  17).  It 
is  a  resurrection  from  the  dead :  the  believer  has  passed 
out  of  death  into  life  (John  v.  24 ;  1  John  iii.  14). 
This  language  is,  it  is  true,  figurative,  but  it  has  none  the 
less  a  definite  and  perfectly  intelligible  meaning:  the 
change  of  heart  involves  a  transformation  in  the  spiritual 


THE   NEW    LIFE  459 

sphere  so  great  that  it  can  only  be  adequately  illustrated 
by  the  greatest  of  all  transformations  in  the  natural  sphere 
— creation,  birth,  and  death. 

This  change  may  be  considered  from  two  points  of 
view,  the  divine  and  the  human.  It  is  the  work  of  God 
through  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  it  is  the  sinner's  own  work. 
Theologians  commonly  distinguish  the  two  aspects  of  the 
one  spiritual  transformation  as  regeneration  and  connersion. 
God  changes  the  heart ;  man  changes  it.  Of  these  two 
factors  regeneration  takes  the  precedence.  The  sinner  is 
utterly  helpless  apart  from  God  ;  he  cannot  take  the  fii'st 
step  in  the  direction  of  salvation  ;  his  sin  holds  him  in 
bondage.  Ilis  inability  is  none  the  less  real  because  it  is 
moral  and  not  natural.  The  invisible  chains  of  our  own 
forging  hold  us  quite  as  strongly  as  any  that  God  might 
liave  forged  in  our  original  constitution.  Consequently 
the  need  of  God's  grace  is  absolute ;  no  other  release  is 
possible.  This  grace  has  come  to  us  and  all  men  objec- 
tively through  the  atoning  work  of  Christ.  But  it  must 
also  come  to  us  subjectively  through  the  inward  work  of 
the  Holy  Spirit.  We  are  justified  on  the  ground  of  what 
Christ  has  done  as  high-priest ;  we  can  be  regenerated 
and  sanctified  only  through  the  work  of  Christ  the  King, 
operating  upon  our  hearts  through  his  Spirit.  Otherwise 
salvation  is  impossible,  man's  chief  end  can  be  reached  in 
no  other  \\?iS-.  "  Yerily,  verily,  I  say  unto  thee,  Except  a 
man  be  born  from  above,  he  cannot  see  the  kingdom  ot 
God ; "  "  Ye  must  be  born  from  above"  (John  iii.  3,  7). 

This  work  of  the  Spirit  in  regeneration  has  a  mysterious 
element  in  it ;  it  takes  place,  in  part  at  least,  out  of  the 
sphere  of  oui-  consciousness.  The  access  of  God  and 
Christ  to  our  souls  through  the  Spirit  is  a  fact  to  which 
consciousness  testifies ;  every  man  hears  the  divine  voice 
in  conscience  and  feels  the  strivings  of  the  God  within 
urging  him  to  follow  the  better  way,  and  every  Christian 
has  the  witness  of  the  Spirit  and  a  personal  fellowship 


460  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

witli  the  Father  and  Christ  tlirongh  Ilim.  But  this  is  the 
region  of  the  supernatural ;  there  is  in  it  an  infinite  factor 
whicli  evades  onr  attempts  to  analyze  and  understand  it. 
We  know  the  work  of  the  Spirit  in  regeneration  from  its 
results :  "  The  wind  bloweth  where  it  listeth,  and  thou 
hearest  the  voice  thereof,  but  knowest  not  whence  it 
Cometh,  and  whither  it  goeth  :  so  is  every  one  that  is  boi'n 
of  the  Spirit "  (John  iii.  8).  "We  know  that  we  have  been 
born  because  we  have  entered  the  new  life.  We  know 
that  of  ourselves  we  could  not  have  produced  the  result. 
We  cainiot  doubt  that  the  true  cause  is  that  which  revela- 
tion describes  and  the  workings  of  which  we  know  in  our 
experience  both  before  and  after  the  change  of  heart, 
namely,  that  Spirit  of  God  which  is  also  the  Spirit  of 
Christ. 

The  Spirit  does  not  work  without  means.  The  Kew 
Testament  lays  great  emphasis  upon  the  "  word,"  or  the 
truth,  as  the  instrumentality  especially  employed  by  God 
in  regeneration  :  "  Of  his  own  will  he  brought  ns  forth  by 
the  word  of  truth  "  (James  i.  18) ;  we  have  been  "  begot- 
ten again,  not  of  corruptible  seed,  but  of  incoiTuptible, 
through  the  word  of  God,  which  liveth  and  abideth  "  (1 
Pet.  i.  23).  But  we  are  not  to  understand  that  the  Spirit 
works,  so  to  speak,  at  arm's-length  or  at  second-hand ; 
rather  lie  uses  the  truth  by  making  it  directly  effectual  ; 
lie  gives  it  an  efficacy  which  it  would  not  and  could  not 
have  in  itself.  The  word  without  the  Spirit  is  an  ai'm  of 
flesh.  It  was  only  when  the  Spirit  brooded  upon  the  face 
of  the  waters  that  the  divine  word  worked  with  creative 
power ;  there  must  be  a  like  moving  of  the  Spirit  in  our 
souls.  There  is  also  besides  the  outward  word  of  the 
preached  Gospel  an  inward  word  of  God  in  every  soul, 
and  doubtless,  as  has  already  been  intimated,  there  is  a 
working  of  the  Spirit  apart  from  the  word. 

We  must  not  regard  the  working  of  the  Spirit  in  re- 
generation  as   physical.     We   often   call    regeneration    a 


THE   NEW   LIFE  461 

"  miracle  of  grace."  But  wo  must  remember  that  all  such 
laii";uai>-e  is  lio'urative.  The  true  miracle  beloiiirs  to  the 
realm  of  nature,  not  to  that  of  spirit.  Regeneration  is 
supernatural  in  the  sense  of  being  due  to  the  direct  effi- 
ciency of  God,  but  it  is  not  miraculous.  The  operation 
of  the  Spirit  upon  our  souls  is  moral  and  spiritual ;  it  in- 
volves influences  like  those  which  one  soul  brings  to  bear 
upon  another.  The  best  analogy,  though  of  course  it  falls 
far  short  of  the  truth,  is  that  which  is  derived  from  the 
personal  relations  of  men.  There  are  changes  of  heart 
on  the  lower  levels  of  life,  which  one  soul  brings  to  pass 
in  another.  What  moral  and  spiritual  transformations 
are  thus  wrought !  How  often  we  see  a  rough,  nncultured 
man  brought  into  an  altogether  new  life  by  the  influence 
of  a  refined  and  gentle  wife  !  How  often  one  friend  will 
bring  another,  by  influence  and  persuasions,  to  choices 
which  change  the  whole  tenor  of  his  life  and  give  charac- 
ter an  utterly  diffei-ent  direction !  How  is  the  change 
produced  ?  By  influences  partly  conscious  and  partly  un- 
conscious, but  all  moral,  all  consistent  with  freedom  on 
both  sides.  Such  are  the  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in 
regeneration.  The  change  is  brought  about  morally.  It  is 
beautifully  described  in  the  Assembly's  Catechism  in  the 
answer  to  the  question,  What  is  effectual  calling  ?  (effec- 
tual calling  being  here  taken  as  equivalent  to  the  Spirit's 
work  in  regeneration).  "  Effectual  calling  is  the  work  of 
God's  Spirit,  whereby,  convincing  us  of  our  sin  and  mis- 
ery, enlightening  our  minds  in  the  knowledge  of  Christ, 
and  renewing  our  wills,  he  doth  j)ersuade  and  enctble  us  to 
embrace  Jesus  Christ,  freely  offered  to  us  in  the  gospel." 

This  brings  us  to  the  human  side  in  the  change  of  heart, 
namely,  conversion,  or,  as  it  is  often  called  in  the  New 
Testament,  repentance.  The  change  of  heart  is  as  truly 
man's  work  as  it  is  God's  work.  From  the  natin-e  of  the 
case  it  must  be  ;  for  if  its  central  and  essential  element  is 
a  new  choice,  our  own  will  must  make  it.     But  it  is  not 


462  PKESKNT    DAY    THEOLOGY 

a  work  which  man  sliares  with  God,  in  such  away  tliat  we 
may  distribute  it  between  God  and  man,  saying,  God  did 
so  nnich  and  man  so  much.  It  is  truer  to  say  that  God 
did  it  all  and  man  did  it  all.  God  did  it  all  in  that  lie 
furnished  power  and  motive  and  inlluence  ;  it  never  could 
have  come  to  pass  without  Him.  The  sinner  did  it  all  in 
that  it  was  his  own  choice,  like  any  other  choice  the  out- 
come of  his  own  will.  Here  at  the  highest  point  in  man's 
moral  and  spiritual  nature,  in  the  highest  exercise  of  the 
human  will,  God  works  through  man  without  hindrance, 
to  will  and  to  do  of  His  good  pleasure.  This  is  not  a  mere 
co-operation,  or,  as  it  is  called  in  theology,  synergism ;  it 
is  a  realization  of  the  divine  will  through  the  human  will. 
Yet  the  human  will  is  free  in  it.  Conversion  is  not  a 
natural  process  but  a  moral  one.  It  is  a  choice  and  a  free 
choice.  The  soul  is  not  under  the  compulsion  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  It  is  never  freer  than  when  it  is  making  its 
supreme  choice.  It  has  power  to  the  contrary  and  knows 
that  it  has.  The  divine  grace  is  not  irresistible  although 
it  is  unresisted.  It  carries  the  will  with  it,  but  not  apart 
from  the  will's  free  consent.  I  grant  that  there  is  a  mys- 
tery here.  So  is  there  in  every  exercise  of  freedom. 
There  is  a  mystery  in  the  fact  that  I  can  change  the  whole 
tenor  of  my  fellow's  life,  persuading  him  to  nuike  choices 
which  involve  an  entire  transformation  of  character  in 
great  spheres  of  life,  and  yet  he  remain  free.  But  I  will 
not  throw  away  the  freedom  because  it  is  encompassed 
with  mysteries.  A  doctrine  of  invincible  grace,  which 
denied  the  true  freedom  of  man  in  conversion,  would  land 
me  in  far  greater  mysteries. 

There  has  been  much  controversj^  among  theologians  re- 
specting the  relation  of  the  two  elements  in  the  change  of 
heart,  and  also  the  relation  of  the  change  of  heart  to 
faith  and  justification.  Which  comes  first,  regeneration 
or  conversion?  Does  the  change  of  heart  precede  faith 
and  justification?  or  do  faith  and  justification  come  first 


THE   NEW   LIFE  463 

and  the  change  of  heart  follow  ?  I  greatly  doubt  whether 
the  controversy  will  ever  be  settled  by  the  victory  of  either 
party.  The  process  by  which  the  soul  passes  out  of  its 
lost  condition  into  the  kingdom  of  God  is  complex  ;  it  is 
composed  of  a  number  of  factors  so  united  as  to  defy  a 
complete  analysis.  It  is  so  with  all  our  moral  and  spiritual 
crises.  Here  is  a  young  girl,  careless,  light-hearted,  still 
a  child  in  thought  and  act.  She  gives  her  heart  to  the 
man  of  her  choice,  and  lo  !  all  at  once  she  is  transformed 
into  an  earnest,  thoughtful,  devoted  woman.  All  at  once 
the  stream  that  ran  merrily  along  the  surface  has  found 
deep  channels,  where  it  moves  slowly  and  mirrors  the 
heavens  in  its  depths.  Who  shall  analyze  the  change, 
distributing  the  factors  and  assigning  them  to  their  re- 
spective causes,  in  her  will  and  the  will  of  her  lover  ? 
AVho  shall  say  which  came  first,  faith  or  love?  An  at- 
tempt at  such  analysis  would  be  absurd.  It  is  not  less  ab- 
surd in  the  case  of  the  great  change,  the  new  birth.  This 
much  indeed  we  may  say,  that  God's  activity  comes  first 
in  time  in  the  movements  which  precede  the  change  ;  His 
Spirit  moves  upon  the  soul  and  draws  it  toward  Christ. 
But  when  the  change  takes  place,  the  divine  and  the 
human  elements  are  united  in  one  inseparable  act.  We 
may  say  that,  logically,  the  regeneration  is  first,  because 
the  predominant  agency  is  the  Spirit,  but  we  cannot  say 
that  it  is  first  in  time.  The  relation  of  the  chano-e  of 
heart  to  faith  and  justification  is  equally  incapable  of 
analysis.  Faith  is  one  side  of  the  change  itself  ;  or,  we 
might  say,  the  change  involves  faith  and  faith  involves 
the  change.  So  far  as  the  will  lays  hold  upon  the  divine 
grace,  appropriating  it,  it  is  faith  ;  so  far  as  it  makes 
choice  of  the  supreme  end,  it  is  conversion.  But  who 
shall  say  that  faith  and  conversion  are  two  distinct  acts 
of  the  will,  however  clearly  they  may  be  distinguished  ? 
The  two  are  only  formally  different ;  they  are  different 
aspects  of  a  single  choice.     Justification  belongs  to  the 


464  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

same  complex ;  it  comes  not  before  or  after,  but  witli  the 
faith  and  the  change  of  heart,  the  one  indivisible  change. 

The  result  of  the  change  of  heart  is  a  neio  man.  The 
sinner  is  transformed  into  a  child  of  God.  The  old  sinful 
self  is  lost  and  a  new  self  is  found,  a  self  which  has  its 
center  and  its  life  in  God.  Love  is  its  principle.  The 
kingdom  of  God  lias  begun  to  come  in  the  regenerate 
soul. 

It  is  common  to  say  that  the  change  of  heart  is  instan- 
taneous, and  tliere  is  a  measure  of  truth  in  the  statement. 
The  distinction  between  a  supreme  choice  of  self  and  a 
supreme  choice  of  God  is  a  sharp  one ;  there  seems  to  be 
no  intermediate  ground.  We  cannot  serve  God  and  Mam- 
mon (Matt.  vi.  24).  The  sinner  in  his  conversion  makes 
a  complete  revolution.  Nevertheless,  we  mu&t  somewhat 
modify  the  statement.  In  the  first  place,  we  must  distin- 
guish between  the  change  and  the  consciousness  of  the 
change  ;  men  are  not  always  able  to  recognize  the  precise 
time  and  manner  of  the  change.  They  may  be  able  only 
to  say  with  the  blind  man,  "  One  thing  I  know,  that, 
whereas  I  was  blind,  now  I  see  "  (John  ix.  2.5).  In  the 
second  place,  we  must  remember  that  the  power  of  choice 
passes  through  a  process  of  growth  and  development. 
The  child  reaches  the  full  maturity  of  freedom  only  by  a 
process.  Now  it  is  possible  under  Christian  nurture  to  so 
guide  the  growing  freedom  of  the  child  that  there  shall  be 
a  gradual  growth  into  the  fulness  of  the  Christian  life. 
In  such  cases  conversion  does  not  seem  to  be  instantaneous. 
Doubtless  there  is  a  point  somewhere,  where  the  personal 
free  will  takes  upon  it  the  full  responsibility  of  the  su- 
preme choice.  But  it  seems  not  so  much  a  crisis  as  an 
indistinguishable  point  in  a  continuous  process.  I  do  not 
say  that  such  cases  are  numerous ;  but  they  are  likely  to 
be  increasingly  numerous  as  the  kingdom  of  God  becomes 
more  fully  established  and  as  the  power  of  Christian  nurt- 
ure is  more  generally  recognized  and  made  use  of. 


THE   NEW   LIFE  465 

II.  Let  us  next  look  briefly  at  the  more  important 
factors  of  the  new  life. 

First  among  these  I  place  the  union  of  the  believer 
with  Christ.  This  is  established  in  justification  and  the 
new  birth,  and  becomes  a  permanent  element  in  the  Chris- 
tian life.  It  is  a  part  of  the  kingly  work  of  the  Saviour, 
and  essential  to  that  complete  salvation  at  which  redemp- 
tion aims.  Christ,  by  his  redemptive  work,  united  himself 
with  the  human  race,  becoming  its  Head  and  Saviour. 
In  justification  this  relation  becomes  a  personal  one,  and 
in  regeneration  it  becomes  an  internal  spiritual  relation. 
In  the  new  life  this  union  is  the  basis  and  source  of  the 
whole  work  of  grace.  The  sinner  has  given  himself  up  to 
the  Saviour,  and  the  lattei'  abides  and  works  in  him 
through  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  Master  himself  illustrated 
the  nature  of  this  union  by  the  similitude  of  the  vine  and 
the  branches  (John  xv.  1-10) :  "I  am  the  vine,  ye  are 
the  branches  :  he  that  abideth  in  me,  and  I  in  him,  the 
same  bringeth  forth  much  fruit :  for  without  me  ye  can 
do  nothing  "  (ver.  5).  The  apostles  compare  this  union 
with  the  union  between  the  husband  and  the  wife  (Eph. 
V.  31,  32) ;  with  that  between  the  head  and  the  members 
of  the  body  (1  Cor.  xii.  12) ;  with  that  between  a  building 
and  its  foundation  or  corner-stone  (Eph.  ii.  20-22).  The 
Christian  is  in  Christ :  "  There  is  now  no  condemnation 
to  them  that  are  in  Christ  Jesus  "  (Rom.  viii.  1).  Christ 
dwells  in  the  Christian :  "  It  is  no  longer  I  that  live,  but 
Christ  liveth  in  me  "  (Gal.  ii.  20).  The  sanctiflcation  of 
the  believer  is  a  "  forming  of  Christ  "  in  him  (Gal.  \v.  19). 
This  is  a  union  of  fellowship,  communion,  and  love,  in 
which  the  believer  comes  consciously  into  personal  rela- 
tions with  Christ  and  the  Father.  Christ  dw^ells  in  his 
heart  by  faith  (Eph.  iii.  17).  lie  has  that  personal  knowl- 
edge of  the  only  true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ  whom  He  has 
sent,  which  is  life  eternal  (John  xvii.  3).  It  is  also  a  union 
of  life.  The  Saviour's  life  is  bestowed  through  the  Spirit 
30 


466  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

upui'i  the  believer,  strengthening  and  l)nilding  liini  np  in 
holiness  and  Christian  manhood,  and  capacitating  him  for 
Christian  service.  It  is  a  foretaste  of  that  closer  nnion 
which  is  to  exist  in  the  perfected  kingdom  of  God. 

A  second  factoi-  in  the  new  life,  closely  connected  with 
the  one  just  mentioned,  is  the  indwelling  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  It  is  through  the  Spirit  that  Christ  dwells  and 
works  in  the  soul.  In  the  new  birth  the  Holy  Spirit,  who 
has  access  only  to  the  outer  court  of  the  sinner's  heart  and 
moves  upon  it,  so  to  speak,  from  without,  entei's  the  holy 
of  holies,  the  sanctuary  of  the  will.  Henceforth  that  is 
His  home,  the  place  where  He  does  His  w^ork.  The 
Spirit  is  the  agent  of  Christ  in  the  process  of  the  new  life. 
His  activity  is  partly  revealed  to  the  believer's  conscious- 
ness :  He  bears  witness  with  our  spiiit  that  we  are  the 
children  of  God  (Rom.  viii.  16).  It  is  partly  below  con- 
sciousness. It  is  to  be  noted,  also,  that  the  Spirit  is  not 
only  the  internal  source  of  our  spiritual  life,  but  even  of 
the  redeemed  physical  life.  The  body  is  a  temple  of  the 
Spirit,  and  the  Spirit  is  the  earnest  of  the  resurrection  (1 
Cor.  vi.  19  ;  2  Cor.  v.  5). 

A  third  factor  in  the  Christian  life  is  faith.  In  our 
theological  investigations  we  are  too  apt  to  confine  our  con- 
sideration of  faith  to  the  beginnings  of  the  Christian  life, 
attending  exclusively  to  what  is  called  justifying  faith. 
But  faith  is  a  permanent  element  of  the  new  life.  It  is 
always  the  subjective  condition  of  all  its  processes.  Paul 
said,  "The  life  which  I  now  live  in  the  flesh,  I  live  by  the 
faith  of  the  Son  of  God,  who  loved  me,  and  gave  himself 
for  me  "  (Gal.  ii.  20).  We  may  speak  as  truly  of  sancti- 
fication  by  faith  as  of  justification  by  faith.  The  recep- 
tive attitude  which  faith  involves  is  essential  for  the  car- 
rying out  of  all  the  divine  work.  It  is  thus  that  the  in- 
ward righteousness,  which  is  as  truly  a  gift  of  God's  grace 
as  the  so-called  "  imputed"  righteousness,  is  apj^ropriatcd. 
The  faith  of  the  Christian  life  is  the  faith  which  "  \vork- 


THE   NEW   LIFE  467 

etli  by  love"  (Gal.  v.  6).  Like  justifying  faith  it  is  with- 
out merit,  the  hand  that  receives  the  divine  largess. 

The  last  of  these  factors  which  I  will  mention  is  the  fel- 
lowship of  Christians.  The  believer  does  not  pursue  his 
career  alone.  He  is  a  inember  of  a  great  organism,  of 
which  Christ  is  the  Head  and  all  Christians  are  members, 
the  body  of  Christ  (1  Cor.  xii.).  He  is  not  merely  a  son 
of  God,  but  a  brother  of  all  God's  children.  The  king- 
dom of  God  is  social  as  well  as  individual.  No  man  liveth 
unto  himself  in  it.  The  chui'ch  is  the  body  of  believers^ 
and  every  Christian  is  a  member  of  the  church,  which  is 
one  and  universal. 

in.  ]^ext  let  us  look  at  the  process  of  the  new  life,  or 
sanctification.  The  Christian  when  he  first  enters  the 
kingdom  of  God  is  still  a  sinner.  He  stands  at  the  begin- 
ning of  a  long  road.  He  has  chosen  God  as  his  chief 
D-ood   and  made  the  kino-dom  his  chief  end.     But  such  a 

o  o 

choice  only  slowly  works  out  the  results  of  the  old  sinful 
choices.  There  remains  much  land  to  be  possessed. 
There  is  need  of  a  complete  salvation,  which  shall  not 
leave  any  of  the  evil  of  sin  unremoved.  God  makes  no 
man  perfectly  holy  by  a  miracle  of  grace.  The  work  of 
reducing  the  conquered  country  of  the  believer's  soul  to 
harmony  and  order  is  gradual.  The  whole  Christian  life  is 
a  progressive  dying  nnto  sin  and  living  unto  righteousness. 
In  this  work  God  and  the  believer  co-operate.  The  power 
comes  from  God,  but  the  work  is  done  by  man.  God 
works  in  lis  to  will  and  to  do  of  His  good  pleasure,  and 
we  work  out  our  own  salvation  with  fear  and  trembling 
(Phil.  ii.  12,  13).  Were  the  Christian  life  what  it  ought 
to  be,  there  would  be  perfect  and  loving  harmony  between 
God  and  the  believer  in  the  w^ork.  Both  would  pursue 
unwaveringly  the  same  great  end.  As  it  is,  in  our  feeble- 
ness and  sin  we  only  approximate  to  the  ideal. 

The  doctrine  of  sanctification  implies  that  the  Christian 
is  under  the  divine  law.     We  saw,  when  considering  the 


468  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

doctrine  of  justification,  that  God's  forgiveness  is  not  an 
indulgence  on  the  ground  of  which  the  believer  may 
freely  sin,  but  that  it  has  for  its  object  his  holiness. 
When  the  apostles  say  that  we  are  not  under  law  but  under 
grace,  and  speak  of  the  law  as  abolished,  they  are  referring 
to  the  meritorious  ground  of  salvation.  The  believer, 
since  he  lias  been  and  is  a  sinner,  can  never  claim  eternal 
life  as  a  reward.  It  will  always  be  a  matter  of  fi-ee  grace. 
But  this  does  not  make  the  law  less  binding  upon  him  as 
a  rule  of  duty.  On  the  contrary,  it  is  even  more  bind- 
ing, since  now  the  hindrances  in  the  way  of  its  observance 
are  removed  and  God's  Spirit  is  given  to  supply  the  be- 
liever with  moral  power.  Christianity  gives  no  quarter 
to  the  antinoniianism  which  would  deliver  the  Christian 
from  the  restraints  of  the  moral.  It  repudiates  such  a 
doctrine  with  holy  horror.  The  Gospel  is  through  and 
through  ethical.  I  know  that  some  will  insist  that  we 
cannot  maintain  this  ground  unless  we  admit  that  good 
works  are  in  some  way  instrumental  in  securing  our  sal- 
vation. They  say,  "  If  you  teach  that  men  are  saved  by 
God's  grace  alone  and  not  by  their  good  works,  what 
motive  can  you  give  them  to  lead  them  to  holiness  ? 
"What  use  is  there  in  obedience,  since  salvation  is  not 
dependent  upon  it?"  But  this  objection  arises  from  a 
M'holly  inadequate  conception  of  the  Christian  system. 
The  chief  end  of  man  is  not  to  escape  punishment  and  get 
into  heaven ;  it  is  to  fulfil  the  divine  will  in  the  redemp- 
tive kingdom.  It  is  indeed  true  that  good  works  can 
never  be  the  meritorious  ground  of  salvation,  but  they  are 
an  essential  element  in  the  salvation  itself.  The  faith 
that  would  rest  upon  God's  justifying  grace  and  not  mani- 
fest itself  in  good  works  is  no  true  faith.  Justification 
and  regeneration  mean  sanctification  as  truly  as  the  seed 
and  the  warm  earth  and  the  air  and  sunshine  mean  plant 
and  blossom  and  fruit.  No  man  can  liave  the  faith  which 
secures  forgiveness  and   the  purpose  which  initiates  the 


THE   NEW    LTEE  469 

new  life  and  not  have  for  his  great  aim  and  object  tlie 
love  and  obedience  which  the  law  requires.  Paul  asks 
the  question,  "  Shall  we  continue  in  sin,  that  grace  ma}- 
abound?"  And  his  answer  is,  "God  forbid.  We  who 
died  to  sin,  how  shall  we  any  longer  live  therein  ? " 
(Rora.  vi.  1).  He  teaches  precisely  the  same  doctrine  as 
that  of  James,  which  has  so  often  been  represented  as 
contradicting  his  teachings.  The  latter  says,  "  What  doth 
it  profit,  my  brethren,  if  a  man  say  he  hath  faith,  but  have 
not  works  'i  can  that  faith  save  him  ?  .  .  .  Faith,  if 
it  have  not  works,  is  dead  in  itself  "  (James  ii.  14,  17). 
Good  works  do  not  merit  salvation,  but  they  are  an  es- 
sential element  in  the  salvation  itself.  Faith  alone  justi- 
fies, but  the  faith  that  does  not  press  on  to  love  and  good 
works  is  no  faith  at  all,  but  dead,  sham  faith. 

There  is  still  one  point  at  which  the  doctrine  must  be 
guarded.  In  saying  that  good  works  are  not  the  meritori- 
ous ground  of  salvation,  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  they  are 
not  meritorious.  God  approves  them,  and,  if  I  under- 
stand the  Kew  Testament  aright.  He  even  rewards  them. 
When  a  man  has  been  placed  by  God  upon  a  platform  of 
grace,  his  good  works  have  a  real  though  relative  value. 
They  will  never  merit  salvation  ;  they  are  themselves  the 
result  not  of  the  believer's  unaided  efforts,  but  of  the 
Spirit  of  Christ  working  in  him.  But  God  views  them 
with  favor  and  grants  rewards  proportioned  to  them. 
Though  all  the  redeemed  will  be  saved  solely  on  the 
ground  of  Christ's  work,  there  seems  good  reason  to  be- 
lieve that  there  will  be  differences  of  reward  correspond- 
ing to  the  different  degrees  of  obedience  and  faithfulness 
in  this  life. 

Before  leaving  this  branch  of  our  subject,  we  must  en- 
deavor to  answer  the  question,  Whether  complete  sanctifi- 
cation  is  ever  attained  in  the  pi-esent  life  ?  On  the  one 
side  there  are  those  who  confidently  assert  that  every 
Christian  can,  if  he  will,  reach  this  state,  and  that  there 


470  PRESETTT   BAY   TnEOLOGY 

are  mnltitiides  of  Christians  wlio  liave  ali'eacly  reached  it. 
On  the  other  side  there  are  those  who  affirm,  with  equal 
confidence,  not  only  that  no  man,  save  Christ  alone,  has 
ever  attained  perfection  in  this  life,  bnt  that  no  man  can 
do  it.  Now  theoretically,  as  it  seems  to  me,  tlie  perfec- 
tionists have  a  good  case.  There  is  no  reason  in  the 
nature  of  things  why  the  Christian  should  not  reach  a 
condition  of  perfect  holiness  in  this  life.  Christ  did  so, 
and  while  the  Christian  starts  at  an  immense  disadvan- 
tage as  compared  with  Christ,  since  he  possesses  innate 
tendencies  to  sin  and  sinful  habits  which  are  the  result  of 
his  old  sinful  choices,  yet  he  is  fi-ee  and  has  the  aid  of 
Christ's  Spirit.  I  should  be  very  loth  to  deny  the  possi- 
bility as  an  abstract  possibility  ;  those  who  do  so,  it  seems 
to  me,  inevitablj^  weaken  the  sense  of  I'esponsibilit}-  and 
abridge  the  guilt  of  sin. 

But  the  question  whether  men  have  the  abstract  power 
to  become  perfect  in  this  life  is  one  thing,  and  the  ques- 
tion whether  any  men  do  so  is  quite  another.  The  latter, 
which  is  the  practical  question,  mnst  be  answered  by  the 
appeal  to  facts  as  we  find  them  in  the  Scripture  and  Chris- 
tian experience.  IN^ow  I  denj^  that  facts  justify  the  asser- 
tion that  believers  become  perfect  in  the  present  life. 
The  Scripture  gives  no  countenance  to  the  view.  There 
are  indeed  Bible  characters  who  are  called  perfect,  but  as 
soon  as  we  come  to  examine  the  facts,  we  find  that  the 
word  is  used  relativel}"  and  not  absolutely,  to  indicate  their 
piety  and  not  their  sinlessness.  The  Bible  records  many 
sins  committed  by  its  perfect  men.  The  Lord's  Prayer  is 
intended  for  all  Christians,  yet  it  would  be  inappropriate 
in  the  mouth  of  a  sinless  man.  Paul  declares  himself  not 
to  have  already  obtained  or  already  to  have  been  made 
perfect,  but  only  to  be  pressing  toward  the  goal  (Phil.  iii. 
12-14).  James,  writing  to  Christians,  affirms  that  "in 
many  things  we  all  stumble  "  (James  iii.  2).  John,  also 
writing  to  Christians  and  directly  addressing  them,  sol- 


THE   NEW   LIFE  471 

emnly  avers,  "if  we  say  tliat^wc  have  no  sin,  we  deceive 
ourselves,  and  the  truth  is  not  in  us  "  (1  John  i.  8).  Chris- 
tian expei'ience  in  all  ages  testifies  to  the  same  fact.  The 
most  holy  Christians,  who  have  made  the  highest  attain- 
ments in  the  Christian  life,  bewail  their  sins  and  are  con- 
scious of  being  far  from  perfect. 

Those  who  hold  the  doctrine  of  perfection  do  so  only 
at  the  price  of  a  complete  lowering  of  the  conception  of 
sin.  Of  course  if  we  set  our  standard  low,  it  is  eas}^  to 
attain  it.  The  Pelagians,  who  make  sin  a  light  matter, 
have  no  trouble  in  being  perfect.  The  Antinomians,  who 
deny  the  obligation  of  the  law  so  far  as  Christians  are 
concerned,  simply  give  sin  another  name  and  sin  freely 
under  the  guise  of  holiness,  and  the  Christian  world  has 
had  only  too  sad  reason  to  know  what  that  kind  of  perfec- 
tionism means.  As  for  our  Methodist  brethren — of  whose 
piety  and  earnest  purpose  no  one  stands  in  doubt — they 
also  lower  the  standard.  The  sinless  perfection  which 
they  claim  to  attain  is  like  Yoltaire's  Holy  Roman  Em- 
pire ;  it  is  neither  sinless  nor  is  it  perfection.  Wesley 
admits  that  perfect  men  commit  "involuntary  transgres- 
sions" of  the  law.  Another  prominent  writer  upon  the 
subject  quotes  with  approval,  as  describing  the  state  of 
sinlessness  which  believers  attain  in  this  life,  the  phrase 
of  Archbishop  Leighton,  "  imperfect  perfection  "  (Whe- 
don,  "Doctrines  of  Methodism,"  Bibliotheca  Sacra,  vol. 
xix.,  p.  2Y1).  But  what  is  an  involuntary  transgression  of 
God's  law  ?  What  is  imperfect  perfection  ?  The  first  is 
a  contradiction  in  terms  and  the  second  is  no  better.  The 
best  Christian  52«6' — just  that  and  nothing  less;  he  does 
those  things  which  he  ought  not  to  do,  and  leaves  un- 
done those  things  which  he  ought  to  do.  His  sin  does  not 
consist  merely  in  the  involuntary  movings  of  his  corrupt 
inherited  nature  or  in  the  involuntary  consequences  of  his 
old  sins.  He  sins  freely.  That  which  fills  with  shame 
the  soul  of  the  best  and  holiest  Christian  in  his  moments 


472  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

of  self-examination — and  most  of  all  sncli  a  Christian — is 
not  the  frailtj  which  he  cannot  help  (of  which  there  is 
indeed  enough),  but  the  sins  which  he  could  have  helped 
and  which,  notwithstanding,  he  freely  committed.  If  j'ou 
ask  me,  Why,  if  he  is  free,  does  he  not  help  it?  I  answer, 
That  is  the  m^'stery  of  freedom,  which  I  cannot  solve. 
A  free  choice  is  an  ultimate  fact.  But  as  I  have  said 
before,  so  let  me  say  now — let  not  the  mystery  of  free- 
dom induce  us  to  exchange  it  for  the  difficulties  and 
absurdities  of  determinism.  By  God's  grace  the  believer 
more  and  more  dies  unto  sin  and  lives  unto  I'ighteousness. 
The  conquest  comes  not  here,  but  on  the  other  side  of 
death. 

lY.  But  the  Christian's  career  on  earth  is  not  merely 
occupied  wnth  sanctification,  it  involves  also  his  service  in 
the  kingdom  of  God.  Every  Christian  has  a  vocation. 
Ilis  life  is  "  a  plan  of  God."  He  is  elected  for  some  par- 
ticular work  in  the  kingdom.  We  all  recognize  this  fact 
in  practice,  but  it  is  not  sufficiently  regarded  in  our  theo- 
logical discussions,  while  even  in  our  preaching  it  is  too 
often  left  out  of  view.  Sanctification  has  to  do  with  the 
formation  of  character.  But  character  is  not  the  be-all 
and  the  end-all  in  Christianity.  It  is  not  even  the  highest 
thing  in  the  Christian  life,  apart  from  its  effects.  Char- 
acter is  a  means  to  an  end,  and  that  end  is  service.  We 
are  to  be  sons  of  God  in  doing  as  well  as  in  beino^.  The 
effort  of  many  Christians  seems  to  be  solely  or  chiefly 
directed  toward  the  formation  of  character.  But  this 
may  be,  and  often  is,  mere  selfishness.  Character  has  its 
great  preciousness,  biit  it  is  a  preciousness  that  is  revealed 
only  in  service.  Heaven  is  not  to  be  a  mutual  admiration 
society,  where  the  redeemed  will  exhibit  their  characters 
to  each  other,  as  prize-fighters  might  show  their  thews 
and  muscles.  God  has  put  us  into  this  universe  to  do  His 
work.  There  is  work  to  be  done  in  this  world,  and  work 
to  be  done  in  heaven.     The  Christian's  work  here  is  to 


THE   NEW   LIFE  473 

build  lip  God's  kingdom.  This  task  has  been  committed 
to  men,  and  every  believer  has  a  share  in  it.  He  is  to 
employ  in  this  service  both  his  secular  avocation  and  his 
religious  opportunities.  Each  Chi'istian  has  his  own  pe- 
culiar task.  The  twelfth  chapter  of  Romans  and  the 
twelfth  chapter  of  First  Corinthians  show  what  a  strong 
hold  this  idea  of  service  had  upon  the  minds  of  the  in- 
spired leaders  of  the  early  church. 

But  I  have  time  only  to  mention  this  subject,  though  it 
is  most  inviting  and  suggestive.  We  must  pass  now  to 
our  last  topic,  namely, 

Y.  Christian  perseverance. 

The  Bible  seems  to  teach,  and  Christian  experience  to 
confirm,  the  doctrine  that  God  enables  all  true  believers  to 
persevere  unto  the  end.  The  Saviour  says  of  his  sheep, 
"  They  shall  never  perish,  and  no  one  shall  snatch  them 
out  of  my  hand.  My  Father,  which  hath  given  them 
unto  me,  is  greater  than  all,  and  no  one  is  able  to  snatch 
them  out  of  the  Father's  hand  "  (John  x.  28,  29).  Paul 
expresses  his  confidence  that  He  who  began  a  good  woi-k 
in  the  Christian  will  perfect  it  until  the  day  of  Jesus 
Christ  (Phil.  i.  6).  In  the  eighth  chapter  of  Romans  the 
Christian  is  represented  as  bound  to  God  by  a  chain  which 
reaches  from  eternity  to  eternit}',  and  it  is  declared  that 
nothing  can  separate  him  from  the  love  of  God  in  Christ 
Jesus  his  Lord.  Peter  tells  us  that  Christians  are  guarded 
by  the  power  of  God  through  faith  unto  a  salvation  ready 
to  be  revealed  in  the  last  time  (1  Pet.  i.  5).  Jude's 
epistle  ends  with  a  doxology  unto  "  him  that  is  able  to 
guard  3^ou  from  stumbling,  and  to  set  you  before  the 
presence  of  his  glory  without  blemish  in  exceeding  joy  " 
(Jude  24).  It  is  true  that  there  is  a  condition  to  this 
divine  grace.  It  is  promised  only  to  those  who  continue 
in  faith  and  in  the  use  of  the  means  of  grace.  God  does 
not  grant  his  salvation  in  any  external  way.  He  saves 
men  through  their  own  wills,  not  apart  from  them,  and  by 


474  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

the  use  of  prayer  and  the  otlier  means  of  grace.  But  the 
assurance  seems  to  be  that  the  true  Christian,  who  has 
that  genuine  faith  wliich  receives  God's  grace  and  presses 
on  toward  love  and  obedience  and  holiness,  will  not  be 
permitted  to  fall.  God  will  hold  fast  to  him  and  protect 
him  from  his  enemies,  as  well  as  from  his  own  sinful 
nature. 

It  is  true  that  there  are  some  passages  in  the  Kew 
Testament  which  seem  to  teach  the  possibility  of  falling 
from  God's  grace  (Luke  xiv.  34  ;  John  xv.  4-6  ;  I  Cor.  ix, 
27  ;  Ileb.  vi.  4-6  ;  x.  26  ;  2  Pet.  ii.  20,  21).  But  these 
are  either  intended  to  guard  Christians  against  self-conii- 
dence  or  to  show  the  danger  of  those  who  have  mistaken 
an  imperfect  religious  experience  for  genuine  faith.  The 
awful  warnings  of  the  passages  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  are  addressed  to  Christians  in  dangei'  of  apos- 
tatizing, and  were  meant  to  show  that  they  could  look  for 
no  salvation  outside  of  Christianity.  They  are  passages 
wdiich  the  opponents  of  the  docti'ine  of  perseverance,  who 
base  their  doctrine  upon  the  freedom  of  the  will,  never 
dare  to  use,  for  they  would  prove  too  much  for  their  pur- 
pose. 

The  chief  objections  urged  against  the  doctrine  of  per- 
severance are  that  it  militates  against  the  freedom  of  man 
and  that  it  tends  to  beget  a  false  securit}'  on  the  part  of 
Christians.  With  regard  to  the  first,  it  is  to  be  observed 
that  Imman  freedom  has  its  full  exercise  in  the  supreme 
choice  of  faith  and  conversion,  which  becomes  the  perma- 
nent choice  of  the  Christian  life.  It  is  only  through  this 
choice,  and  not  apart  from  it,  that  God  brings  the  believer 
to  the  final  blessedness.  That  God  should  insure  to  the 
man  who  has  freely  put  liimself  into  the  divine  hands, 
and  keeps  himself  there,  the  attainment  of  the  chief  end 
at  which  he  aims,  is  conservative  of  freedom  and  not  sub- 
versive of  it.  The  other  objection  is  equally  inapplicable. 
The  doctrine  of  perseverance  implies  a  real  faith  on  the 


THE   NEW   LIFE  475 

part  of  the  Chiistian,  but  such  a  faith  is  inconsistent  witli 
a  false  secnrit3\  Tiie  doctrine  is  indeed  dangerous  to  those 
who  have  no  real  faith,  but  only  think  that  they  have  ; 
but  so  is  the  whole  scheme  of  divine  grace  dangerous  to 
them,  and  the  objection  could  be  urged  quite  as  strongly 
against  the  doctrine  of  justification.  To  the  genuine 
Christian  it  must  always  be  a  ground  of  infinite  joy  and 
satisfaction  tliat  tlie  almighty  arms  are  round  about  him 
and  that  they  will  never  let  him  go. 

This  leads  me  to  say,  in  conclusion,  a  word  respecting 
Christian  assurance.  This  grace  is  rather  a  privilege  than 
an  essential  element  of  the  Christian  life.  Yet  it  is  a 
privilege  which  every  child  of  God  may  enjoy.  The 
Spirit  bears  witness  with  the  believer's  spirit  that  he  is 
the  son  of  God.  On  the  basis  of  this  inward  witness  he 
may  have  a  comfortable  assurance.  He  may  know  that 
he  is  forgiven,  that  the  Father  smiles  upon  him,  that 
Christ  is  his  and  that  he  is  Christ's,  and  that  he  is  an  heir 
of  the  eternal  inheritance.  This  assurance  of  faith  is  of 
inestimable  value.  It  may  include  a  well-grounded  assur- 
ance of  hope,  which  reacheth  forth  to  that  which  is  within 
the  veil.  As  the  experience  of  faith  goes  on,  and  the 
communion  of  the  believer  with  the  Father  and  Christ 
through  the  Holy  Spirit  becomes  more  and  more  intimate, 
and  as  the  fruit  of  the  Spirit  is  increasingly  manifested 
in  the  life — tho  love,  joy,  peace,  long-suffering,  kindness, 
goodness,  faithfulness,  meekness,  temperance,  of  which 
Paul  speaks  (Gal.  v.  22) — the  assurance  should  become 
stronger  and  more  invincible.  It  does  so  in  normal  Chris- 
tian experience.  There  are  exceptions  and  they  show 
that  such  assurance  is  not  vitally  essential.  But  doubtless 
the  highest  and  best  work  for  Christ  is  done  only  by  those 
who  possess  it.  The  Christian  who  does  not  have  it  will 
do  well  to  pray  and  strive  that  he  may  obtain  it. 


XXYL 

THE    OTHER   LIFE 

We  come  now  to  escliatology,  the  doctrine  of  the  last 
things.  To  us  mortals  this  is  an  "  undiscovered  country," 
except  so  far  as  revelation  has  thrown  light  upon  the  suh- 
ject.  Steadily  we  all — to  use  a  phrase  of  Cai-lyle's — are 
"  marching  forward  into  the  mists  of  the  future  tense." 
Bnt  how  ignorant  we  are  of  what  lies  before  us !  The 
history  of  the  world  in  the  ages  that  are  to  come  after  we 
Iiave  passed  from  the  stage  is  hidden  from  us  ;  the  experi- 
ence of  the  past  and  the  knowledge  of  the  causes  now  at 
work  enable  us  to  do  little  more  than  make  a  few  shrewd 
guesses  respecting  what  is  to  come.  Of  that  other  world 
of  the  future,  from  which  we  are  separated  only  by  a 
breath  and  a  pulse-throb,  we  know  still  less. 

It  becomes  us  therefore  to  approach  these  subjects  with 
the  recognition  of  our  limitations  and  our  dependence 
upon  him  who  is  the  Light  of  men.  Christ  knows  more 
concerning  these  things  than  we.  If  we  have  had  personal 
experience  of  his  reality  and  power  in  the  forgiveness  of  sins 
and  the  new  life,  we  shall  do  well  to  take  him  as  our  guide 
when  we  enter  this  dark  region.  Many  things  must  be 
inexplicable  to  us,  for  at  the  best  we  shall  see  as  in  a  mir- 
ror darkly.  But  though  heaven  and  earth  pass  away,  his 
words  shall  not  pass  away.  He  is  the  Truth.  He  has  the 
words  of  eternal  life.  We  show  the  highest  wisdom  when 
we  take  his  teachings  and  those  of  his  inspired  apostles  in 
their  plain  simple  meaning  with  childlike  confidence.  It 
is  folly,  and  worse  than  folly — if  we  truly  accept  Christ 


THE   OTIIEU   LIFE  477 

as  our  Master — to  turn  and  twist  bis  words  that  we  may 
put  our  own  meaning  upon  them.  What  do  we  know 
upon  these  subjects  ?  How  far  will  tlie  Httle  rushlight  of 
our  reason  tlirow  its  rays  into  the  profound  darkness  of  the 
last  things  ?  Can  we  not  trust  God  ?  Have  we  no  faith  in 
His  love  and  righteousness  ?  Let  us  be  patient.  Let  us  take 
Christ's  doctrine  as  we  find  it.  Let  us  avoid  all  dogma- 
tism while  dealing  with  these  solemn  themes — the  dog- 
matism of  too  positive  denial,  as  well  as  the  dogmatism 
of  too  positive  assertion.  Let  us  be  charitable  and  tolerant 
toward  those  who,  though  as  loyal  as  we  to  Christ,  come 
to  conclusions  differing  from  ours. 

The  subject  which  I  wish  to  treat  in  the  present  chapter 
is  the  other  life.  First,  we  will  look  at  the  proof  of  the 
existence  of  the  other  life  and  then  at  the  nature  of  it.  In 
discussing  the  latter  point  I  shall  confine  myself  to  what 
is  called  the  intermediate  state,  or  the  period  between 
death  and  the  resurrection. 

I.  We  consider,  first,  the  fact  of  the  other  life.  This  is 
denied  by  materialists  of  all  kinds,  philosophical,  scientific, 
religious.  The  man  who  will  not  admit  the  existence  of  a 
soul,  distinct  and  separable  from  the  body,  is  compelled  to 
take  this  position.  The  struggle  between  religion  and 
materialism  is  therefore  d  Voutrance.  We  cannot  here  go 
into  the  philosophical  refutation  of  materialism.  It  would 
carry  us  far  beyond  the  limits  which  we  have  thus  far 
observed.  But  I  cannot  be  content  to  deal  with  the  sub- 
ject of  the  other  life  merely  as  a  doctrine  of  revealed 
theology.  It  is  one  of  the  great  fundamental  religious 
truths  upon  which  natural  theology  also  has  its  decided 
word  to  say. 

1.  I  take  up  the  rational  proof  of  immortality.  First, 
however,  let  us  understand  the  fact  to  be  proved  ;  it  is 
not  the  existence  of  an  endless  life  beyond  the  grave  but 
of  a  continued  life.  Tlie  question  we  have  to  answer  is, 
Does   deatli  end    all  ?     The    other   question,    Does    the 


478  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

soul  exist  forever  ?  reason  cannot  answer ;  revelation  alone 
can  tell  us.  Let  us  also  understand  the  limitations  of  the 
rational  proof  for  immortality.  Reason  can  give  us  no 
absolute  proof  of  the  life  beyond.  It  lies  outside  of  expe- 
rience ;  no  man — save  he  who  died  and  rose  again — has 
ever  crossed  the  dead-line  and  returned  to  reveal  its  mys- 
teries. The  doctrine  of  immortality  cannot,  like  the  doc- 
trine of  God,  be  verified  in  conscious  experience.  What 
the  rational  argument  for  the  other  life  can  do  is  to  show 
us  that  all  tiie  presumptions  of  nature  point  toward  it,  so 
that  the  burden  of  proof  lies  upon  him  who  would  deny 
it.  The  most  reason  can  claim  is  that  there  is  the  highest 
probability  that  the  soul  continues  to  exist  after  death. 
But  even  this  is  much.  Even  the  Christian  cannot  do 
without  it. 

The  first  argument  is  drawn  from  the  religious  con- 
sciousness of  man.  The  belief  in  immortality  is  universal. 
The  soul  instinctively  assumes  the  existence  of  a  life  be- 
yond the  grave.  The  facts  of  the  world  produce  this  im- 
pression. Philosophy  may  deny  it,  but  the  simple,  un- 
sophisticated judgment  of  men  in  all  ages  and  all  nations 
demands  it.  It  is  not  an  occasional  or  accidental  belief, 
but  asserts  itself  as  a  necessity  of  human  thought.  From 
the  rude  animism  of  the  black  African  up  to  the  high 
reasonings  of  Plato's  Phaedo,  the  common  faith  is  mani- 
fested in  every  conceivable  form.  It  is  one  of  the  strands 
in  the  threefold  cord  which  binds  the  souls  of  all  men  to- 
gether, the  truths  which  Kant  represents  as  postulates  of 
the  practical  reason — God,  duty,  immortality.  Now  such 
a  universal  belief  cannot  be  a  mere  imagination.  Man's 
constitution  cannot  so  deceive  hnn  in  a  matter  of  such 
tremendous  importance.  Such  a  universal  and  necessary 
subjective  conviction  must  have  a  corresponding  objective 
reality. 

We  come  next  to  the  so-called  metapiijsieal  argument, 
advanced  in  ancient  times  by  Plato  and  ui'ged  with  great 


THE   OTHER   LIFE  479 

force  during"  the  last  century  by  Bishop  Butler.  As  the 
jirguinent  used  to  be  presented,  it  started  from  the  assump- 
tion of  the  essential  simplicity  of  the  soul.  Modern  |)sy- 
cholog'y  has  led  us  somewhat  to  modify  the  form,  while  we 
preserve  the  substance,  of  the  proof.  We  no  longer  claim 
the  absolute  simplicity  of  the  soul,  but  we  still  affirm 
that  there  is  such  simplicity  connected  with  it,  namely,  in 
personality  oi'  self-consciousness.  The  self,  or  "  I,"  is  the 
most  perfect  unity  of  which  we  have  any  knowledge.  It 
abides  through  all  our  experience  absolutely  one  and  the 
same.  It  has  no  elements  which  we  can  distinguish,  even 
in  thought,  but  is  the  permanent,  always  identical,  indi- 
visible subject  of  all  our  thoughts  and  acts.  Now  the 
great  physical  law  of  the  conservation  of  matter  and  en- 
ergy forbids  the  thought  of  annihilation.  What  we  call 
destruction  in  the  case  of  material  things  means  merely 
dissolution  and  change.  We  burn  a  stick  of  wood  on  our 
hearth  and  it  disappears,  but  the  chemist  shows  us  that 
not  a  particle  has  been  lost.  The  ashes,  the  smoke,  the 
carbonic  dioxide,  contain  tlie  wood  in  another  form. 
What  is  death  ?  We  see  one  side  of  it,  the  dissolution  of 
the  body.  The  dust  returns  to  the  earth  as  it  was.  There 
is  no  annihilation,  but  a  compound  body  is  reduced  to  its 
original  elements.  Our  bodies  during  life  are  in  a  state 
of  unstable  equilibrium,  material  particles  and  forces  held 
together  by  that  mysterious  co-ordinating  power  which 
we  call  life  for  lack  of  a  better  name.  Life  ceases  and 
the  elements  fall  asunder  like  the  particles  of  the  desert 
sand-pillar  when  the  revolving  wind  subsides.  But  the 
self-conscious,  self-determining  "  I "  is  not  thus  compound 
and  unstable  ;  so  far  as  we  know  it,  it  is  absolutely  one 
and  simple.  What  becomes  of  it  ?  Is  there  no  law  of 
conservation  in  the  sphere  of  spirit  ?  Have  we  any  right 
to  assume  that  it  is  annihilated  ?  Do  not  the  analogies 
and  presumptions  of  nature  point  the  other  waj^  ?  I  grant 
that  the  materialist  will  not  admit  the  force  of  this  reason- 


480  PItE6ENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

ing  ;  to  him  pei'sonality  is  au  illusion.  But  for  all  others 
I  claim  that  the  argument,  rightly  used,  has  great  weight. 
It  is  not  demonstrative,  but  it  affords  a  reasonable  proba- 
bility. It  shuts  the  mouth  of  the  adversary.  If  he  ad- 
mits the  existence  of  the  self-conscious  "  I,"  he  cannot 
present  any  rational  grounds  for  the  denial  of  its  survival 
of  death.  Butler,  arguing  from  the  simplicity  of  the 
soul,  was  obliged  to  concede  that  his  argument  would 
prove  the  immortality  of  animals  ;  but  if  we  confine  our- 
selves to  man's  personality,  no  such  conclusion  can  be 
drawn  ;  the  animal  is  conscious,  but  not  self-conscious ; 
sentient,  but  not  personal. 

A  third  argument  is  the  teleological,  based  upon  the 
evidence  of  a  final  cause  in  man.  Men  exhibit  in  their 
constitution  and  development  a  far-reaching  purpose. 
The  powers  of  man  are  in  worth  and  capability  far  beyond 
anything  else  in  nature.  Man  is  the  microcosm.  All  the 
highest  elements  of  the  universe  are  concentrated  in  him. 
He  is  the  one  being  in  the  world  that  has  the  power  to 
understand  the  world  and  to  make  it  subservient  to  him- 
self. Eternity  is  in  his  heart  (Eccles.  iii.  11).  lie  dis- 
covers and  apprehends  the  infinite.  lie  is  a  progressive 
being ;  there  is  no  liniit  to  his  capacity  for  development. 
Now  we  judge  a  being's  final  cause  from  its  powers  and 
capacities.  Viewed  in  this  light  how  high  is  the  purpose 
which  man  seems  created  to  subserve  !  How  great  are 
the  ends  which  lie  is  fitted  to  accomplish !  And  yet  no 
man  attains  his  end  in  this  world.  Scarcely  has  he 
reached  the  maturity  of  his  powers  and  begun  his  work 
when  disease  lays  him  low  and  death  cuts  him  off.  The 
broken  shaft  is  the  emblem  of  human  life.  We  all  leave 
our  task  unfinished.  With  infinite  pains  we  fit  ourselves 
for  our  work,  we  train  our  powers  to  the  most  perfect  use, 
and  then  we  have  to  stop.  We  step  out  upon  the  stage 
and  receive  the  plaudits  of  the  audience,  and  just  as  we 
are  beginning  to  pla}',  the  curtain  falls.     Can  we  believe 


THE   OTHER   LIFE  481 

that  this  is  all?  Is  there  siicli  waste  in  the  universe? 
Are  all  of  these  powers  and  capacities  for  nothing? 
When  a  Hower  in  our  gardens  here  in  the  North  conies 
only  to  the  bud  before  the  frosts  of  autumn  wither  it,  we 
infer  that  it  was  made  to  bloom  in  a  warmer  and  more 
favored  clime.  Shall  we  not  reason  in  the  same  way  with 
regard  to  ourselves  ?  Must  there  not  be  another  life,  for 
which  this  is  a  preparation  ?  Is  not  that  the  reasonable 
inference  ?  In  physical  science  we  regard  that  hypothesis 
as  nearest  the  truth  which  best  correlates  and  explains  the 
facts.  Does  not  the  hypothesis  of  immortality  best  ex- 
plain the  facts  of  human  life,  and  is  it  not  reasonable  to 
accept  it  as  true  ? 

Once  more,  we  draw  an  argument  from  the  moral 
sphere.  Deep  seated  in  the  human  soul  is  the  sense  of 
justice.  The  law  which  conscience  declares,  and  which  is 
at  work  in  the  world  about  us,  is  the  law  of  righteous  re- 
tribution. Goodness  deserves  happiness  ;  sin  deserves 
suffering.  There  is  a  fixed  connection  between  right  and 
blessedness,  between  wrong  and  pain.  But  this  connec- 
tion is  not  maintained  in  this  life.  The  good  suffer  ;  the 
wicked  prosper.  There  are  anomalies  that  are  incapable 
of  explanation  if  we  look  only  at  this  life.  The  Lisbon 
earthquake,  with  the  untold  sufferings  which  it  entailed 
upon  good  and  evil  alike,  shakes  the  faith  of  multitudes 
in  God.  Successful  villany  carries  away  all  the  prizes  of 
life,  and  men  ask,  "  Can  there  be  a  God  in  heaven  ?  " 
But  the  difficulties  disappear  if  we  suppose  this  life  to  be 
only  the  vestibule  to  the  other  life.  We  can  understand 
how  in  a  state  of  probation  and  education  a  state  of  things 
may  be  temporarily  allowed,  which  would  not  be  per- 
manently justifiable.  Assume  the  reality  of  immortality 
and  all  is  clear. 

Finally,  there  is  a  religious  argument.  This  brings  us 
to  the  outward  edge  of  natural  theology  and  finds  its  full 
application  only  in  the  light  of  revelation.  Man  was 
31 


482  PRESENT   BAY   THEOLOGY 

made  for  God  and  His  kingdom,  lie  alone,  of  all  the 
beings  in  the  world,  is  a  religious  being.  lie  alone  has 
communion  with  God  and  knows  liiniself  to  be  made  for 
God.  He  consciously  finds  his  chief  good  in  God,  and 
knows  that  the  divine  love  rests  upon  him.  But  a  being 
that  is  thus  related  to  God  cannot  be  a  creature  of  a  day. 
He  must  be  made  for  a  higher  life  than  that  of  the  beasts 
which  perish.  The  lower  orders  are  mere  means  to  an 
end  that  lies  beyond  them.  But  man,  made  in  God's 
image  and  fitted  for  communion  with  Him,  is  in  a  true 
sense  an  end  in  himself.  There  must  therefore  be  a 
higher  life  in  which  man  will  live  with  God.  The  life  of 
communion  with  Him  here  must  find  its  fruition  in  the 
eternal  life. 

Upon  these  arguments  the  believer  in  immortality  bases 
his  conviction.  He  claims  that,  while  the  proofs  do  not 
amount  to  a  demonstration,  which  from  the  nature  of  the 
case  is  impossible,  they  furnish  in  their  cumulative  power 
an  irrefutable  presumption  in  favor  of  immortality  and 
render  the  rejection  of  the  other  life  unreasonable. 

2.  But  let  us  examine  the  teachings  of  the  Bible  re- 
specting the  subject  we  are  considering. 

We  shall  misunderstand  the  Old  Testament  doctrine  of 
the  other  life,  if  we  see  it  solely  through  the  medium  of 
our  modern  Christian  modes  of  thought.  We  distinguish 
between  this  life  and  the  other  life.  Not  so  the  He- 
brews ;  their  antithesis  was  between  life  and  death.  The 
Old  Testament  begins  with  a  doctrine  of  death.  Accord- 
ing to  the  first  chapters  of  Genesis,  it  is  not  natural  to 
man,  but  has  come  into  the  world  as  the  punishment  of 
sin.  It  is  natural  for  the  animal  to  die,  but  man  is  not  an 
animal.  What  is  death  ?  It  is  not  the  mere  act  of  dying, 
but  the  state  into  which  men  enter  when  they  die ;  and 
this  state  is  the  opposite  of  life.  By  life  the  Hebrew 
meant  man's  bodily  existence  on  earth,  with  all  that  it  im- 
plies, its  strength  and  health  and  vigor  of  mind  and  bodj', 


THE   OTHER   LIFE  483 

its  possessions,  its  work,  its  joys,  its  fellowship  with  uieii 
aud  God.  By  death  he  meant  the  cessation  of  bodily  ex- 
istence, the  loss  of  life's  possessions  and  joys,  the  tei'niina- 
tion  of  its  labors,  the  relinquishment  of  its  friendships  and 
its  comnnmion  with  God.  Thei'e  are  those  who  assert 
that  the  Old  Testament  does  not  recognize  the  continu- 
ance of  the  soul  after  death,  and  that  the  word  death,  as 
used  by  the  Old  Testament  writers,  is  synonymous  with 
cessation  of  existence.  But  notlung  could  be  farther 
from  the  truth.  The  immortality  of  the  soul  is  every- 
where taken  for  granted,  while  in  not  a  few  instances  it  is 
distinctly  asserted.  The  translation  of  Enoch  and  Elijah 
implies  it.  When  it  is  said  of  the  dead  that  they  "  have 
gone  to  their  fathers,"  or  have  been  "  gathered  to  their 
fathers,"  and  this  is  distinguished  from  their  burial,  there 
is  a  clear  intimation  of  continued  existence  (Gen.  xxv.  8 ; 
XXXV.  29  ;  xlix.  29,  33).  The  prohibition  of  necromancy 
in  the  Jewish  law,  and  the  story  of  Saul's  experience  with 
the  witch  of  Endor,  show  what  was  the  prevalent  view 
of  the  Hebrew  people.  Slieol,  or  the  underworld,  is  the 
state  and  place  of  the  dead,  in  which  they  are  represented 
as  still  leading  a  conscious  existence.  When  the  king  of 
Babylon  dies,  the  inhabitants  of  Sheol  are  moved  at  his 
coming ;  they  come  to  meet  him  and  address  him  (Is.  xiv. 
9-20).  But  while  the  Old  Testament  represents  death  as 
a  state  of  continued  conscious  existence,  it  is  true  to  its 
fundamental  doctrine  that  it  is  the  punishment  of  sin.  It 
is  the  opposite  of  life  with  its  blessedness.  Sheol  is  a 
place  of  darkness,  of  silence,  of  forgetful n ess,  of  separa- 
tion from  God's  revelations  (Job  x.  21,  22  ;  Psalm  xciv. 
17;  cxv.  IT;  Ixxxviii.  5  ;.  Is.  xxxviii.  11).  The  work 
of  life  has  ceased,  and  all  are  at  rest  (Job  iii.  13-19). 
The  inhabitants  of  Sheol  are  called  shades,  the  "  weak  or 
languid,"  in  distinction  from  men  in  this  woj'ld  in  the 
vigor  of  their  life  and  activity.  The  righteous  and  the 
wicked  alike  go  to  it.     While  it  is  not  represented  as  a 


484  PEESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

])lace  of  suffering,  neither  is  it  represented  as  a  place  of 
blessedness.  Death  was  regarded  as  the  great  evil,  life  as 
the  great  blessing.  All  men  must  die  sooner  or  later; 
but  to  live  long  with  the  enjoyment  of  God's  favor  was 
the  especial  reward  of  righteousness,  to  die  an  early  or  vio- 
lent death  under  the  visitation  of  the  divine  wrath  was  the 
especial  punishment  of  sin.  "That  thy  days  may  be  long 
upon  the  land  which  the  Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee"  (Ex. 
xXo  12)  was  the  promise  to  those  who  feared  God.  "That 
soul  shall  be  cut  off  from  among  his  people"  (Ex.  xxxi. 
14)  was  the  threat  to  the  evil-doer. 

It  would  be  a  mistake  to  regard  this  Old  Testament 
conception  of  the  existence  beyond  the  grave  as  given  by 
revelation.  The  work  of  revelation  with  respect  to  the 
subject  was  negative  rather  than  positive.  The  Hebrews 
were  left  to  their  natural  knowledge  of  the  other  world, 
the  action  of  revelation  being  confined  to  restraining  them 
from  the  false  and  pernicious  views  which  were  prevalent 
among  their  heathen  neighbors.  It  was  only  as  time 
went  on  and  the  divine  education  of  the  Jewish  religious 
consciousness  progressed,  that  the  revealing  Spirit  granted 
to  a  few  of  the  prophets  and  inspired  men  glimpses  of 
something  better  in  store  for  the  righteous,  and  a  punish- 
ment for  the  wicked  which  did  not  end  with  the  grave, 
sufficient  only  to  relieve  the  awful  pressure  which  rested 
upon  thoughtful  and  pious  minds  in  view  of  the  inequali- 
ties of  this  life  and  the  common  doom  of  death.  Job 
catches  a  glimpse  of  a  life  in  the  vision  of  God  after  the 
earthly  life  of  suffering  and  contumely  is  over:  "But  I 
know  that  my  Redeemer  liveth,  and  that  he  shall  stand  at 
the  last  upon  the  earth  ;  and  after  my  skin  hath  been  thus 
destroyed,  yet  without  my  flesh  shall  I  see  God,  whom  I 
shall  see  for  myself,  and  mine  eyes  shall  behold,  and  not 
another  "  (Job  xix.  25-27).  The  inspired  Psalmists  have 
a  presentiment  that  the  righteous  shall  be  delivered  from 
Sheol,  and  that  God's  favor  and  life  shall  be  manifested 


THE   OTTIEP.   LIFE  485 

in  the  midst  of  death:  "  Thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul  to 
Sheol  ;  neither  wilt  thou  suffer  thine  Holy  One  to  see  cor- 
ruption. Thou  wilt  show  me  the  path  of  life  :  in  tliy 
presence  is  fulness  of  joy  ;  in  thy  right  hand  there  are 
pleasures  for  evermore "  (Ps.  xvi.  10,  11.  Cf.  Ps.  xvii. 
15  ;  xlix.  15  ;  Ixxiii.  23-26.  See  Delitzsch,  "  Ueber  die 
Psalraen  ").  This  hope  is  enlarged  into  the  prophecy  of 
the  resurrection  (Is.  xxvi.  19),  and  the  doctrine  of  rewards 
and  punishments  in  the  other  world  (Dan.  xii.  2  seq. ;  Is. 
Ixvi.  24). 

The  question  is  asked,  why  the  Old  Testament  does  not 
give  a  fuller  and  clearer  doctrine  of  the  other  life.  The 
answer  is  not  altogether  easy,  yet  we  can  see  some  of  the 
reasons.  In  the  heathen  religions  with  which  Israel  was 
surrounded,  and  which  were  contiimally  seducing  the 
Chosen  People  from  their  allegiance  to  Jehovah,  the  doc- 
trine of  the  other  world  was  associated  with  the  worst 
errors  and  abuses.  That  these  errors  might  be  avoided  it 
was  needful  that  the  emphasis  should  be  placed  upon 
other  things.  The  great  lessons  which  revelation  had  to 
teach  under  the  Old  Dispensation  related  to  the  present 
life.  They  were  that  the  highest  good  of  man  is  to  be 
found  in  the  favor  and  love  of  God,  a  lesson  to  be  learned 
now  and  here  in  the  presence  of  the  living  Jehovah  ;  and 
that  God's  kingdom  is  to  be  established  in  this  world. 
When  these  truths  had  become  the  religious  property  of 
mankind,  then  the  curtain  might  be  lifted  and  the  other 
world  be  revealed  in  its  continuity  with  this.  For  the 
moral  and  spiritual  destiny  of  man  is  to  be  worked  out  in 
the  present  life  ;  the  ways  we  choose  here  we  follow  there. 
To-day  the  order  is  the  same  ;  first  we  must  learn  that  the 
chief  end  of  man  is  to  be  realized  in  the  love  and  service 
of  God  ;  then  we  are  ready  to  understand  the  meaning  of 
the  life  beyond. 

The  obscurity,  which  is  so  remarkable  a  feature  of  the 
Old  Testament  teachings  respecting   the  subject   before 


486  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

US,  disappears  when  we  come  to  the  New  Testament. 
Christ  lias  "  abolished  death,  and  brought  life  and  innnor- 
tality  to  light  through  the  gospel "  (2  Tim.  i.  10),  that  is, 
the  incorruptible  or  immortal  life.  i>ut  let  us  not  misun- 
derstand :  Christ  and  the  apostles  do  not  devote  their 
strength  to  the  preaching  of  immortality,  in  the  sense  of 
a  continued  existence  of  the  soul  after  death.  This  they 
always  took  for  granted,  except  in  cases  like  that  referred 
to  in  Lnke  xx.  37,  when  the  truth  had  to  be  defended 
against  the  materialists  of  the  time,  the  Sadducees,  who 
believed  neither  in  angel  nor  spirit  (Acts  xxiii.  8).  Like 
the  Old  Testament  writers,  they  taugiit  that  death  is  the 
common  doom.  The  new  element  in  the  Saviour's  teach- 
ing, which  gives  the  New  Testament  doctrine  a  character 
so  entirely  different  from  that  of  the  Old,  was  along  the 
line  of  the  truth  that 

"  'Tis  not  the  whole  of  life  to  live, 
Nor  all  of  death  to  die." 

Jesus  gave  a  new  and  deeper  meaning  to  the  words  life 
and  death.  He  re-emphasized  the  truth,  of  which  the 
old  Testament  saints  and  inspired  men  had  not  obscure 
glimpses,  that  what  makes  the  present  life  alone  worth 
living  is  the  favor  of  God,  and  that  what  alone  makes 
death  worth  feaiing  is  His  displeasure.  But  he  went  fur- 
ther and  revealed  the  truth,  of  Avhich,  as  we  have  seen,  the 
Old  Testament  saints  had  only  a  dim  presentiment,  that 
the  life  which  begins  here  in  the  favor  of  God  is  an  eter- 
nal and  incorruptible  life,  which  persists  beyond  the  grave 
and  turns  the  darkness  of  death  into  light  and  glory. 
"  This  is  life  eternal,"  he  said,  *'  that  thej^  should  know 
thee  the  only  true  God,  and  him  whom  thou  didst  send, 
even  Jesus  Christ "  (John  xvii.  3).  It  is  the  spiritual  life 
which  begins  in  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  reconciliation 
with  God  and  is  nourished  and  developed  in  the  commu- 
nion and  service  of  the  kingdom  ;  it  is  the  life  grounded 


THE    OTHER   LIFE  487 

in  Christ's  work  and  flowing  from  his  person.  Whoever 
has  this  life  docs  indeed  die,  but  death  is  not  death  to 
him;  it  is  swallowed  up  in  life.  And  the  spiritual,  work- 
ing outward  to  the  material  through  God's  ineffable 
power,  communicates  its  blessed  life  to  the  body,  so  that 
although  it  returns  to  the  earth  as  it  was,  yet  it  is  restored 
throuofh  the  resurrection.  Of  all  this  the  Saviour's  own 
resurrection  is  the  proof. 

On  the  other  hand,  Christ  reveals  a  new  significance  in 
death.  Death  is  the  universal  doom  of  sin.  But  as  it  is 
transformed  into  blessedness  by  the  eternal  life  which 
comes  to  the  believer  through  Christ,  so  it  is  turned  into  a 
personal  doom  and  darkened  and  intensified  in  the  case  of 
those  who  resist  the  divine  offers  of  mercy.  "  The  sting 
of  death  is  sin"  (1  Cor.  xv.  56).  According  to  the  Sa- 
viour's teaching,  there  is  a  spiritual  death,  beginning  here 
in  the  soul's  separation  from  God,  which  works  itself  out 
in  the  sufferings  of  the  other  world. 

II.  We  have  now  to  consider  the  nature  of  the  other 
life.  Om-  guide  here  will  be  the  Bible,  Unassisted  hu- 
man reason  throws  little  or  no  light  upon  the  character 
and  ongoings  of  the  world  beyond  the  grave. 

Revelation  distinguishes  two  great  stages  in  the  history 
of  the  other  world,  separated  from  each  other  by  the  sec- 
ond coming  of  Christ,  the  resurrection  and  the  last  judg- 
ment. The  first  is  called  by  theologians  the  "interme- 
diate state  ; "  the  second  is  the  final  state,  which  reaches 
on  into  the  endless  eternity.  It  is  with  the  first  of  these 
stages  that  we  have  to  do  at  the  present  time.  It  is  to  be 
noted,  before  we  enter  upon  the  further  discussion  of  the 
subject,  that  the  ISTew  Testament  passes  somewhat  lightly 
over  the  intermediate  state.  The  emphasis  of  the  Bible 
is  laid  upon  the  present  life,  the  time  of  the  great  decis- 
ions, and  the  consummation  of  the  kingdom  at  the  return 
of  Christ  in  glory.  It  was  upon  this  latter  event,  together 
with  the  resurrection  and  the  judgment  and  the  eternal 


488  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

state  beyond,  tliat  the  thoughts  and  liopcs  of  tlie  early 
church  were  fixed,  rather  tlian  on  the  state  after  death. 
Nevertheless,  though  the  references  of  Christ  and  the 
apostles  to  the  intermediate  state  are  few,  they  are  explicit 
and  sufficient  to  give  us  all  needful  knowledge. 

The  state  after  death,  according  to  the  New  Testament, 
is  one  of  conscious  existence.  This  would  seem  to  go  with- 
out saying,  considering  the  fact  that  it  is  taught  even  in 
the  Old  Testament.  There  are,  however,  those  who  deny 
it,  basing  their  view  upon  the  literal  interpretation  of  cer- 
tain Bible  words.  Many  of  the  advocates  of  tlie  doctrine  of 
conditional  immortality — of  which  I  shall  speak  more  fully 
when  we  come  to  the  subject  of  retribution — claim  that 
man  is  non-existent  during  the  period  between  death  and 
the  resurrection.  Accordino;  to  these  relio;ious  material- 
ists,  the  soul  cannot  exist  apart  from  the  body,  and  they 
insist  that  the  word  death,  wherever  it  is  used  in  the 
Bible,  signifies  cessation  of  existence.  Others,  like  Arch- 
bishop Whately,  follow^ing  a  similar  line  of  reasoning  and 
giving  a  literal  interpretation  to  the  word  sleep  when  used 
in  the  Bible  with  respect  to  the  dead,  declare  that  the  soul 
at  death  enters  into  a  state  of  slumber  and  thus  waits  in 
unconsciousness  the  coming  of  the  Saviour  and  the  resur- 
rection of  the  dead.  But  the  assertion  that  the  soul  can- 
not consciousl}'  exist  without  the  body  is  wholly  without 
rational  foundation,  since  we  have  no  experience  of  such 
a  state  and  therefore  no  basis  for  any  conclusions  resjiect- 
ing  it.  And  apart  from  this  consideration,  the  New  Tes- 
tament decidedly  contradicts  these  views.  When  the 
Saviour  says  that  "  all  live — or  are  living — unto  God,"  he 
uses  language  incompatible  with  the  idea  of  non-existence 
or  unconscious  existence  (Luke  xx.  38).  When  he  de- 
clared, "  Your  father  Abraham  rejoiced  to  see  m}^  day  ; 
and  he  saw  it  and  was  glad,"  he  meant,  according  to 
the  only  satisfactory  interpretation  of  liis  words,  that 
Abraham    in    the   conscious  life  of  the  other  world  had 


THE   OTHER   LIFE  489 

knowledge  of  the  incarnation  and  earthly  life  of  the  Mes- 
siah (John  viii.  56).  The  parahle  of  the  Rich  Man  and 
Lazarus  most  distinctly  asserts  a  state  of  conscious  exist- 
ence for  both  the  righteous  and  the  wicked  (Luke  xvi. 
19-31).  This  parable  clearly  refers  to  the  state  after  death 
and  before  the  judgment.  To  say  that  because  it  is  a  par- 
able it  is  not  to  be  taken  as  evidence  upon  such  a  point,  is 
unworthy  trifling.  A  parable  is  not  a  fable,  but  a  story  of 
real  events,  such  as  are  constantly  happening.  If  Christ 
did  not  intend  the  narrative  to  be  taken  as  true  in  all  its 
essential  details,  he  concealed  his  purpose  in  a  way  of  which 
we  have  no  other  instance  recorded  in  the  gospels.  There 
may  never  have  been  a  real  Dives  or  a  real  Lazarus,  but 
we  cannot  doubt  that  Christ  meant  to  describe  a  real  scene 
in  the  other  world,  such  as  might  happen  with  any  Dives 
or  Lazarus.  The  dying  Saviour's  words  to  the  thief  on 
the  cross,  "To-day  thou  shalt  be  with  me  in  Paradise" 
(Luke  xxiii.  43)  lose  all  significance  unless  they  referred 
to  conscious  existence ;  the  shifts  to  which  the  advocates 
of  the  theories  to  which  I  liave  alluded  have  been  com- 
pelled to  resort  to  avoid  the  clear  meaning  of  these  words 
throw  a  most  instructive  light  upon  the  whole  subject.  If 
the  Saviour's  promise  to  his  disciples  that  he  would  pre- 
pare a  place  for  them  in  his  Father's  house  had  reference 
to  the  state  after  death  and  not  to  the  final  state,  it  adds 
additional  weight  to  the  view  which  I  have  advocated. 
Paul's  description  of  the  state  after  death,  as  "  at  home 
with  the  Lord,"  and  "  with  Christ,"  w^hich  is  "  verj^  far 
better"  (2  Cor.  v.  8  ;  Phil.  i.  23),  loses  all  its  point  if  any 
different  consti'uction  be  put  upon  it. 

Finally,  in  those  portions  of  the  Apocalypse  which  relate 
to  the  intermediate  state,  the  redeemed  are  represented  as 
praising  God  and  the  Lamb  in  the  full  exercise  of  all  their 
conscious  powers  (Pev.  iv.  4  seq. ;  vi.  9 ;  vii.  9  seq. ;  xiv. 
1-5  ;  XV.  2-4  ;  xvi.  7  ;  xix.  1  seq.).  I  know  it  will  be  said 
that  the  Apocalypse  is  a  mysterious  book,  full  of  symbols 


490  PRESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

and  figures,  unci  therefore  not  to  be  taken  into  account  in 
the  consideration  of  a  subject  so  important  as  that  which 
we  are  examining.  But  I  cannot  agree  with  those  who  as- 
sert til  at  the  one  book  in  the  Bible  which  bears  the  name  of 
a  "  revelation  "  is  a  sealed  book  which  reveals  nothing.  I 
know  that  there  are  depths  of  prophetic  truth  in  it  which 
the  plummet  of  the  ordinary  interpreter  cannot  fathom, 
but  it  is,  notwithstanding,  a  plain  book  written  for  plain 
people.  Its  symbols  are  transparent  and  not  opaque.  They 
are  windows  through  which  we  see — far-off,  it  is  true,  and 
transcendent — the  realities  of  the  other  world.  I  regard 
it  not  as  of  less  value  with  respect  to  a  subject  like  that 
with  which  we  are  engaged,  but  rather  of  more  value  than 
those  books  of  the  Bible  which  are  concerned  chiefly  with 
God's  kingdom  on  earth. 

The  JS^ew  Testament  reveals  to  us  in  large  but  clear 
outlines  the  condition  of  the  departed.  We  have  not  all 
the  details  we  could  wish,  but  it  is  not  hard  to  fill  in  the 
picture.  So  far  as  the  physical  conditions  are  concerned, 
the  earthly  body  is  left  behind  and  the  resurrection  body 
has  not  been  given.  It  is  accordingly  common  to  describe 
the  spirits  in  the  other  world  as  disembodied  during  the 
intermediate  state.  This  view  is  favored  by  the  language 
of  Paul,  who,  contemplating  the  possibility  of  dying  be- 
fore the  second  coming  of  Christ,  speaks  of  the  condition 
into  which  he  would  enter  as  a  being  "naked,"  a  being 
"  unclothed,"  a  being  "  absent  from  the  body  "  (2  Cor.  v. 
3,  4,  8).  In  Hebrews  xii.  24  the  blessed  dead  are  called 
"  the  spi?'its  of  just  men  made  perfect,"  and  John  tells  of 
the  "  souls  of  them  that  had  been  slain  for  the  word  of 
God  "  crying  for  vengeance  (Rev.  vi.  9,  10).  Neverthe- 
less, while  the  earthly  body  is  absent  and  the  resurrection 
body  has  not  yet  been  bestowed,  it  is  not  impossible  that 
the  dead  possess  some  organism  through  which  they  can 
act  upon,  and  be  acted  upon,  by  the  material  world.  We 
know  too  little  of  the  nature  of  the  spii-it  to  speak  dogma- 


THE   OTHER   LIFE  491 

ticnlly  npon  a,  point  so  imperfectly  treated  in  tlie  Bible. 
Whatever  the  case  may  be,  we  need  not  have  the  slightest 
doubt  that  the  blessed  spirits  recognize  each  other  and 
communicate  with  each  other,  as  ■well  as  with  the  higher 
intelligences.  It  is  amazing  how  much  doubt  has  l)een 
thrown  upon  the  question  of  recognition  in  the  other 
world.  It  ought  never  to  have  been  an  open  question  at 
all.  It  would  take  a  direct  revelation  to  make  me  believe 
that  God  would  permit  a  state  of  things  so  pitiable  and 
contrary  to  all  that  we  know  of  His  character  as  non- 
recognition  would  imply.  And  I  M'ould  draw  the  same 
conclusion  respecting  the  activities  of  the  other  world. 
Doubtless  the  departed  ones,  "  whether  in  the  body  or  out 
of  the  body,"  hear  the  "  unspeakable  words  "  (2  Cor.  xii. 
3,  4)  and  engage  in  the  active  and  glorious  service  of  the 
life  beyond. 

But  where  are  the  dead  ?  This  a  question  which  has 
its  difficulties  and  which  all  do  not  answer  alike.  Some- 
where the  departed  must  be.  Those  who  talk  of  states 
rather  than  places  in  the  other  world  use  language  which 
may  have  meaning  to  themselves  but  which  conveys  none 
to  my  mind.  God,  the  infinite  Spirit,  who  existed  before 
He  created  time  and  space,  may  be  conceived  as  existing 
in  a  purel}'  spiritual  state,  though  since  the  universe  has 
been  created  He  has  also  a  local  relation,  as  we  strive  to 
show  b}^  means  of  the  doctrine  of  His  omnipresence.  But 
I  cannot  conceive  of  the  finite  spirit  as  unlocalized.  Cer- 
tainly the  Bible  never  so  represents  it.  But  what  and 
where  the  places  are,  is  a  different  question.  According 
to  the  Old  Testament  all  the  dead  are  in  Sheol.  The 
Sheol  of  the  Old  Testament  becomes  the  Hades  of  the 
]^ew.  But  it  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment the  term  Hades  is  never  used  with  reference  to  the 
state  or  abode  of  the  righteous.  It  has  been  asserted  that 
the  parable  of  Dives  and  Lazarus  is  an  exception,  and  that 
both  the  good  man  and  the  bad  man  are  said  to  be  in 


492  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

Hades  ;  but  wliat  it  does  say  is,  that  the  rich  man  "  in 
Hades  lifted  np  liis  eyes  •  *  *  and  seeth  Abraham 
afar  off "  (Luke  xvi.  23) ;  it  does  not  say  that  Abraham 
and  Lazarus  were  tliere.  On  the  contrary,  tlie  place 
which  is  called  "  Abraham's  bosom  "  seems  to  be  entirely 
distinct,  as  it  is  certainly  separated  from  the  place  where 
Dives  is  by  a  great  and  impassable  gulf.  And  whatever 
may  be  the  truth  respecting  this  particular  passage,  the 
other  teachings  of  the  ]SIew  Testament  respecting  the 
blessed  dead  seem  to  place  them  in  heaven,  the  abode  of 
the  holy  angels  and  the  region  in  the  universe  where  God 
manifests  Ills  highest  glory.  The  "  Paradise "  where 
Christ  promised  the  penitent  thief  that  he  should  be  with 
him  on  the  day  of  the  crucifixion  is,  according  to  Paul, 
synonymous  with  the  third  heaven  (2  Cor.  xii.  4),  and  is 
identified  by  John  with  the  same  blessed  place  (Rev.  ii. 
7).  Paul  looks  forward  to  the  other  world  as  being  with 
Christ  (2  Cor.  v.  1-10  ;  Phil.  i.  20-26).  But  everywhere 
in  the  Kew  Testament  Christ  is  represented  as  being  in 
heaven  since  the  ascension  {e.  g.^  Phil.  iii.  20).  The  pas- 
sages in  the  Apocalypse  which  have  already  been  quoted 
as  showing  the  conscious  existence  of  the  dead  represent 
the  redeemed  as  in  the  presence  of  God  and  the  Lamb  in 
heaven . 

In  view  of  these  facts  it  seems  strange  that  so  many 
theologians  should  insist  that  the  pious  dead  do  not  enter 
heaven  until  after  the  judgment.  The  common  doctrine 
of  the  unlearned  Christian,  that  the  souls  of  believers 
go  at  death  immediately  into  heaven  seems  to  liave  the 
Bible  upon  its  side.  If  now  we  ask  how  this  fact  is  com- 
patible with  the  Old  Testament  teachings,  according  to 
which  righteous  and  wicked  alike  enter  Sheol  or  Hades  at 
death,  two  explanations  are  possible.  The  first  is  that 
furnished  by  the  Roman  Catholic  doctrine  of  the  so-called 
Limhus  Patrnm,  which  is  held  in  substance  by  many 
Lutheran  theologians,  according  to  which  the  pious  dead 


THE   OTHER  LIFE  493 

of  the  Old  Dispensation  were  in  a  temporary  abode  in 
Hades — the  Limbo  of  the  fathers — until  the  death  of  the 
Saviour,  who  upon  his  descent  into  Hades  released  them 
and  secured  for  them  admission  into  heaven.  According 
to  this  view  there  has  been  a  change  in  the  othei"  world, 
corresponding  to  the  changes  brought  about  in  this  world 
by  Christ's  redemptive  work.  The  other  view,  which  on 
the  whole  affords  a  simpler  and  more  satisfactory  explana- 
tion is,  that  the  word  Sheol  or  Hades  is  a  general  term 
designating  the  state  and  place  of  the  dead,  but  expres- 
sive rather  of  Jewish  ideas  than  of  revealed  truth.  Reve- 
lation, throwing  its  light  upon  the  other  world,  shows  that 
the  righteous  dead  are  not,  and  never  have  been,  in  the 
general  state  and  abode  of  the  dead,  but  through  Christ's 
conquest  over  death  have  been  brought  into  the  blessed- 
ness of  heaven.  The  word  Hades  is  accordingly  employed 
in  the  New  Testament  to  designate  the  state  of  the  dead 
so  far  as  it  has  not  been  affected  by  redemption.  When 
the  shadow  of  the  divine  displeasure  rested  upon  the 
whole  realm  of  death,  as  was  the  case  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, before  the  higher  revelation  had  been  given,  all 
were  said  to  be  in  Hades.  But  when  Christ  had  lifted 
the  curtain,  it  was  seen  that  only  those  who  have  rejected 
God's  mercy  are  really  there.  If  this  view  be  correct,  the 
change  in  the  use  of  the  word  Hades  would  correspond 
very  nearly  to  that  which  has  taken  place  in  the  use  of 
the  word  death.  As  the  righteous  in  Christ  are  delivered 
from  death,  so  they  are  delivered  from  Hades,  and  the 
Saviour  is  rightly  said  to  have  "  the  keys  of  death  and  of 
Hades  "  (Rev.  i.  18). 

We  pass  to  the  consideration  of  the  mental  and  spiritual 
condition  of  the  dead.  The  redeemed  are,  as  we  have 
seen,  with  Christ.  This  is  the  same  as  saying  that  they 
are  in  a  state  of  happiness.  Christ  is  the  center  of 
heaven.  He  is  the  spring  of  living  waters  from  whom 
all  blessings  flow.     To  be  in  communion  with  him,  and 


494  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOOxY 

through  liim  with  the  Fatlier,  is  eteriuil  life,  and  in  the 
other  world  all  the  hindrances  which  mar  and  obscure 
tliis  conmiunion  are  removed.  The  beatified  believer  sees 
no  more  as  through  a  glass  darkly,  but  face  to  face.  lie 
knows  no  longer  in  part,  but  even  as  also  he  has  been 
known  (1  Cor.  xiii.  12).  In  having  Christ  he  has  all 
things.  Moreover,  he  is  in  the  company  of  the  blessed 
angels  and  of  the  redeemed.  Doubtless  the  earthly  ties 
of  love  and  friendship,  which  were  for  a  time  broken  by 
death,  are  here  reknit.  Nor  shall  we  doubt  that  heaven 
is  a  place  of  activity  and  service.  It  is  indeed  represented 
as  a  rest  (Ileb.  iv.  9  ;  E.ev.  xiv.  13).  But  rest  is  a  rela- 
tive term.  The  redeemed  may  rest  from  their  earthly 
toils  and  cares  and  troubles,  and  yet  engage  in  the  most 
active  pursuits  of  a  higher  order.  The  law  of  continuity 
cannot  be  so  broken  that  those  whose  life  found  its 
fullest  satisfaction  in  service  here  should  be  without  ser- 
vice there.  There  are  passages  in  the  Bible  which  appear 
to  intimate  that  the  saints  above,  who  certainly  make  one 
communion  with  the  saints  below,  are  cognizant  of  the 
events  transpiring  in  the  world  they  have  left  behind. 
The  "  great  cloud  of  witnesses  "  look  on  upon  the  race 
run  by  the  earthly  contestants  for  the  prize  of  God's  high 
calling  (Ileb.  xii.  1).  The  Apocalypse  represents  the  souls 
in  glory  as  eagerly  watching  the  progress  of  God's  judg- 
ments on  earth  and  the  struggles  and  triumphs  of  the 
church  militant.  Christians  here  below  have  come,  we 
are  told,  "  to  the  spirits  of  just  men  made  perfect "  (Ileb. 
xii.  23).  If  the  angels  are  "  ministering  spirits  sent  forth 
to  do  service  for  the  sake  of  them  that  shall  inherit  salva- 
tion "  (Ileb.  i.  14),  is  it  too  much  to  conjecture  that  our 
blessed  dead  who  have  gone  forth  from  us  are  permitted 
to  hover  about  us  and  to  minister,  under  Christ's  guid- 
ance, to  our  needs  ?  Christianity  gives  no  sanction  to  the 
doctrines  of  spiritualism  ;  it  maintains  the  Old  Testament 
law  against  necromancy ;  it  recognizes  the  fact  that  God, 


thp:  other  life  495 

for  wise  reasons,  does  not  allow  us  to  hold  converse  with 
those  who  have  gone  before ;  but  it  does  not  shut  us  oft" 
from  the  comfortable  and  inspiring  hope  and  assurance 
that  the  redeemed,  who  loved  us  so  much  while  we  were 
still  together  in  the  flesh,  are  often  near  us  and  are  assist- 
ing Christ  in  his  high  task  of  making  all  things  work  to- 
gether for  good  to  those  who  love  God. 

Of  the  condition  of  the  unblessed  in  the  intermediate 
state  we  can  speak  less  clearly.  Revelation  only  partially 
lifts  the  veil  upon  their  meagre  existence.  Our  Saviour's 
profound  parable,  to  which  allusion  has  so  often  been 
made,  represents  the  rich  man  as  in  suffering — a  suffering 
of  soul  which  the  material  symbols  employed  do  not  re- 
quire us  to  interpret  as  physical — as  separated  by  an  im- 
passable abyss  from  the  blessedness  of  the  redeemed,  yet 
as  knowing  of  their  happiness.  The  lost  souls  are  in 
Hades,  not  in  the  Gehenna,  where  they  are  to  be  after 
the  judgment.  They  are  under  the  dominion  of  death, 
with  the  consciousness  of  God's  displeasure  resting  upon 
them.  This  is  the  real  death.  The  Hebrews  under  the 
Old  Dispensation  conceived  of  all,  good  and  bad  alike, 
entering  the  dark  and  attenuated  existence  of  Slieol  or 
Hades.  The  New  Testament,  while  teaching  that  the 
righteous  are  made  conquerors  over  death  in  heaven, 
leaves  the  unrighteous  in  Hades,  under  the  power  of 
death,  while  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  upon  them. 

Abraham  in  the  parable  says  to  Dives,  "  Between  us 
and  3^ou  there  is  a  great  gulf  fixed  " — that  is,  firmly  es- 
tablished— "that  they  which  would  pass  from  hence  to  you 
may  not  be  able,  and  that  none  may  cross  over  from  thence 
to  us "  (Luke  xvi.  26).  How  much  are  these  words  in- 
tended to  mean  ?  Do  they  imply  that  the  condition  of  all 
souls  in  the  intermediate  state  is  fixed  ?  or  are  they  con- 
sistent with  the  possibility  of  new  decisions  ?  Is  the  pro- 
bation of  any  classes  extended  into  the  intermediate  state  ? 
I  must  confess  that  this  passage  seems  to  me  to  make  tlie 


496  PllESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

probability  of  such  an  extended  probation  very  small. 
Yet  who  would  deny  this  possibility,  if  the  AVord  of  God 
permits  its  maintenance,  and  if  it  is  consistent  with  the 
general  teachings  of  revelation  ?  I  have  said  in  another 
connection  that  I  cannot  regard  this  hope,  especially  as  it 
is  held  with  regard  to  the  heathen,  as  the  pernicious  doc- 
trine which  it  seems  to  many.  If  there  are  any  souls  that 
have  not  heard  God's  message  of  love  in  this  life,  and  have 
had  no  opportunity  to  make  the  great  decision  of  life,  we 
may  be  sure  that  God  will  either  give  them  a  probation  in 
the  other  world,  or  save  them  without  a  probation.  But 
I  have  already  given  the  reasons  why  it  seems  to  me  more 
probable  that  God  gives  all  men  sufficient  opportunities  in 
the  present  life  to  make  the  great  decision  than  that  lie 
prolongs  the  period  of  probation.  And  if  in  any  instance 
He  does  not  do  so — as  I  think  must  be  the  fact  in  the  case 
of  all  persons  dying  in  infanc}',  and  perhaps  in  the  case  of 
some  older  persons — then  I  see  no  reason  why  they  should 
have  any  probation  at  all.  A  probation  is  not  a  right 
which  we  can  claim  from  God  as  a  matter  of  debt.  It  is 
not  such  an  inestimable  privilege  that  God  is  bound  in 
justice  to  give  it  to  all  beings.  It  does  not  seem  to  me  that 
there  is  any  evidence  in  the  Bible  of  an  extension  of  pro- 
bation into  the  intermediate  state.  We  have,  it  is  true, 
the  two  "  Peter  passages  "  (1  Pet.  iii.  18-22  ;  iv.  6).  But 
even  supposing  that  the  first  of  these — upon  which  the  in- 
terpretation of  the  other  is  dependent — refers  to  a  preach- 
ing by  Christ  in  Hades  after  his  death,  and  not,  as  is  as- 
serted by  some  competent  commentators,  to  a  preaching 
through  his  Spirit  in  the  days  of  Noah,  still  only  a  single 
class,  the  antediluvians,  is  mentioned,  and  that  a  class 
which  had  already  had  an  oppoi-tunity  in  the  present  life 
through  the  faithful  teachings  of  JSToah,  whom  Peter  in  his 
Second  Epistle  (ii.  5)  calls  "  a  preacher  of  righteousness." 
That  a  new  opportunity  was  given  to  these  "  spirits  in 
prison  "  is  not  said,  and  it  is  far  too  sweeping  a  conclusion 


THE   OTHER   LIFE  497 

when,  on  the  ground  of  this  obscure  passage,  the  assertion 
is  made  that  a  probation  is  granted  in  the  other  life  to 
classes  which  aj-e  not  even  mentioned  here.  It  is  also  a 
sio;nificant  fact  that  there  is  no  hint  in  the  New  Testament 
of  such  a  mixed  state  as  this  theory  would  require.  Proba- 
tion implies  a  choice  made  in  the  midst  of  mingled  good 
and  evil  influences  ;  but  the  N^ew  Testament  reveals  to  us 
only  the  two  conditions,  with  their  appropriate  localities, 
the  one  of  certain  salvation,  where  all  the  influences  are 
holy,  the  other  of  irremediable  separation  from  God  and 
the  good.     Between  the  two  the  "  gi'eat  gulf  is  fixed." 

I  would  not  speak  too  positively  upon  this  subject.  God 
knows  that  I  would  welcome  any  larger  hope  for  those  who 
have  fallen  short  of  God's  purpose  concerning  them,  not 
only  for  the  heathen  and  others  who  have  never  heard  of 
Christ  through  the  preached  Gospel,  but  also  for  those 
who  have  heard  of  him  and  have  rejected  him.  I  should 
rejoice  to  have  all  men  saved.  But  the  question  for  me  is 
not  what  I  should  like,  but  what  God  likes.  I  know  very 
little.  God  knows  all  about  it.  The  question  with  me, 
therefore,  is.  How  much  hope  God's  Word  justifies  me  in 
cherishing  and  in  preaching  to  my  fellow-men.  Better 
the  silence  of  faith,  than  a  too  eager  effort  to  justify  God's 
ways  to  men.  I  am  sure  that  God  is  love  and  righteous- 
ness, and  sure  that  He  condemns  no  man  who  has  not  had 
ample  opportunity  to  accept  His  grace.  I  thinh,  judging 
from  all  the  intimations  I  can  find  in  the  Bible,  that  God 
gives  every  soul  possessed  of  mature  moral  capacity  such  an 
opportunity  in  the  present  life.  It  seems  to  me  reasonable 
to  believe  that  any  souls  which  have  no  such  oppoitunity 
for  any  reason — as  in  the  case  of  those  dying  in  infancy 
or  of  older  persons  who  have  not  attained  their  full  moral 
stature — are  saved  without  a  probation.  I  see  no  need  of 
assuming  an  extension  of  probation  into  the  intermediate 
state,  and  no  scriptural  warrant  for  it.  But  I  would  infi- 
nitely I'atlier  accept  such  a  theory,  with  all  its  difficulties- 
33 


498  PIIESENT   DAY    THEOLOGY 

than  believe  that  God  wronged  a  single  soul.  M}'  sympa- 
thies are  with  the  advocates  of  the  doctrine  of  extended 
probation  when  the  contest  is  between  them  and  those  who 
teach  that  souls  are  lost — whether  few  oi'  man}' — without 
having  had  the  opportunitj'  to  accept  God's  grace. 

But  if  we  do  not  accept  the  doctrine  of  extended  pro- 
bation, we  must  suppose  that  there  is  such  a  thing  as  edu- 
cation and  development,  perhaps  discipline  and  purifica- 
tion, in  the  other  life.  Multitudes  of  souls  go  out  of  the 
world — it  seems  reasonable  to  believe — in  a  salvable  state 
yet  altogether  unfit  for  the  highest  blessedness.  A  third 
of  the  human  race  die  in  infancy  before  the  moral  powers 
are  developed.  The  best  Christians  are  imperfect  and 
sinful  when  they  die. 

But  I  must  pause,  before  I  enter  upon  this  part  of  our 
subject,  to  anticipate  the  objection  that  I  am  about  to  ad- 
vocate a  view  tantamount  to  the  Roman  Catholic  doctrine 
of  purgatory.  Purgatory  is  neither  continued  probation 
nor  is  it  the  education  of  souls  in  heaven.  It  is  a  place 
and  state  of  suffering  and  expiation  for  those  who,  while 
cei'tain  of  salvation,  have  not  made  that  complete  satisfac- 
tion for  their  post-baptismal  sins  which  the  Boman  sj-s- 
teni  requires.  According  to  the  Roman  Catholic  docti'ine 
every  sin  committed  after  baptism  must  be  punished  either 
in  this  life  or  the  other.  Purgatory  is  the  place  where 
the  residuum  of  punishment  is  inflicted.  The  length  of 
the  soul's  stay  in  this  place  of  suffering  may  be  shortened 
by  the  prayers  of  the  faithful  on  earth,  the  intercession  of 
the  saints,  and  especially  l)y  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass. 
The  suffering — which  only  according  to  a  part  of  the 
Catholic  theologians  is  by  literal  fire — is  mitigated  by  the 
certainty  of  heaven  and  of  God's  ultimate  favor  and  love. 
The  majority  of  Christians  have  to  pass  through  purga- 
toiy.  It  is  a  place  entirely  distinct  from  heaven  and  the 
abode  of  the  lost,  and  it  is  a  place  of  punishment. 

Kow  in  assuming  that  there  is  education  and  discipline 


THE   OTHER   LIFE  499 

for  souls  that  are  certain  of  salvation,  we  differ  from  the 
doctrine  of  purgatory  in  every  essential  point  but  one. 
The  one  point  is  the  certainty  of  salvation.  The  points 
of  difference  are,  first,  that  we  suppose  all  these  souls  to 
be  in  heaven,  not  in  a  different  state  and  place ;  and  sec- 
ondly, that  we  deny  their  subjection  to  punishment,  af- 
iirming  that  they  are  in  the  full  light  of  God's  love  and 
favor.  What  we  assume  is,  that  heaven  is  a  school,  in 
which,  under  the  gracious  tutelage  of  God  and  Christ  and 
the  holy  angels,  and  such  redeemed  souls  as  have  attained 
a  higher  stage  of  spiritual  development,  the  weak,  sinful, 
imperfect  souls — the  great  multitude  of  children,  the 
heathen,  be  they  many  or  few,  who  are  salvable,  the  vast 
numbers  born  in  Christian  lands  who  have  professed 
Christ,  but  have  had  a  wholly  imperfect  Christian  experi- 
ence, all,  in  a  word,  who  stand  on  the  lower  rounds  of  the 
spiritual  ladder — are  disciplined  and  trained  for  that  ful- 
ness of  blessedness  and  service  which  God  has  in  store  for 
His  children.  Nor  would  I  altogether  exclude  from  this 
school  of  Christ  any  human  follower  of  his,  since  none  of 
those  who  die  have  attained  or  become  perfect.  Yiewed 
in  this  way  heaven,  during  the  intermediate  state,  is  a  place 
of  growth.  It  is  a  busy,  active  place,  where  the  hindrances 
of  the  earthly  life  are  no  longer  present  and  the  progress 
is  steady  and  glorious. 

But,  it  is  asked.  Does  not  this  imply  that  there  is  sin  in 
heaven  ?  In  reply  I  would  say  that,  to  my  mind,  there  is 
nothing  incongruous  in  the  thought  that  such  sin  as  would 
be  compatible  with  a  state  where  all  were  striving  to  at- 
tain the  great  end  of  their  being,  sin  of  mere  infirmity 
and  frailty  and  imperfect  development,  should  temporarily 
exist  there.  But  I  do  not  feel  at  all  sure  that  this  is  the 
case.  I  cannot  agree  with  those  who  think  tliat  death  has 
no  influence  upon  character.  It  is  a  great  and  radical  crisis 
to  those  who  are  introduced  by  it  into  heaven.  Let  the  soul 
be  separated  from  the  earthlj^  body,  with  the  temptations 


500  PEESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

and  impulses  to  sin  inherent  in  it,  and  let  it  be  brought 
into  a  perfectly  holy  environment,  let  it  have  the  vision 
of  Christ,  and  supposing  the  supreme  choice  of  the  soul — 
as  we  must  assume  it — to  be  for  the  good,  1  am  not  sure 
that  such  a  soul  will  not  in  a  way  entirely'  accordant  with 
its  freedom  be  delivered  from  sin,  while  only  its  imper- 
fection and  immaturity  will  be  left.  It  may  be  that  the 
innnemorial  Protestant  belief  upon  this  point  is  right,  and 
that  there  is  a  real  truth  in  the  words  of  the  Assembly's 
Catechism,  that  •'  the  souls  of  believers  are,  at  their 
death,  made  perfect  in  holiness  and  do  immediately  pass 
into  glory."  Of  course  such  perfection  must  be  relative 
and  not  absolute  ;  there  must  be  something  negative  about 
it.  But  may  not  the  holiness  which  the  perfectionists 
claim  as  attained  in  this  life  be  actually  attained,  through 
the  joint  action  of  the  regenerate  will  and  the  holy  envi- 
ronment, under  the  powerful  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
after  the  "  body  of  this  death  "  has  been  laid  aside  and  the 
sinful  environment  of  earth  left  behind  ?  I  can  conceive 
of  even  a  heathen,  in  whom  there  was  already  the  germ  of 
a  holy  choice,  thus  turned  in  an  instant  from  positive  evil 
and  made  the  docile  and  humble  pupil  in  Christ's  school. 

Yet  on  this  whole  subject  I  M'ould  speak  modesth', 
remembering  how  little  revelation  has  made  known  to 
us  on  the  subject  and  how  incompetent  we  are  to  spec- 
ulate upon  it.  In  any  case,  the  school  of  Christ  must  do 
its  work.  The  Christian  who  has  made  the  highest  at- 
tainments here  will  And  himself  a  mere  learner  there, 
while  multitudes  will  have  to  learn  the  very  A  B  C  of 
the  heavenly  knowledge  and  begin  at  the  lowest  stage 
of  the  heavenly  discipline  and  development.  But  what 
blessed  work  it  will  be  for  Teacher  and  scholars,  all  seek- 
ing the  one  great  end  and  animated  by  the  same  holy 
spirit.  Tliei-e  the  Saviour's  principle  will  find  its  perfect 
illustration,  that  the  greatest  shall  be  the  minister  and 
the  first  shall  be  the  bond-servant  (Mat.  xx.  26,  27).    AVhat 


THE   OTHER   LIFE  501 

opportunities  there  will  be  there  for  those  who  have  been 
taken  from  this  world  in  the  fulness  of  their  powers  and 
capacity  for  service  in  God's  kingdom  !  They  may  be  the 
assistants  of  the  great  Teacher.  There  Eliot  and  Brainard 
may  have  found  the  souls  of  their  Eed  Indians,  and  Moffat 
and  Livingstone  the  souls  of  their  dearly  loved  Africans. 
There  some  who  have  been  snatched  away  just  as  their  min- 
istry for  Christ  was  beginning  on  earth  may  find  a  higher 
ministry,  which  will  engage  to  the  full  their  best  powers 
and  give  scope  to  all  the  attainments  tliey  made  below. 

But  someone  will  say,  "  You  reject  the  doctrine  of  ex- 
tended probation  because  it  is  not  taught  in  the  Scripture, 
but  you  put  in  its  place  speculations  about  education  and 
development  about  which  the  Scripture  is  equally  silent. 
Are  you  not  inconsistent  ?  "  I  think  that  thei'e  is  no  in- 
consistency here,  though  I  freely  admit,  as  I  have  done 
before,  that  what  has  been  said  is  largely  speculation. 
The  question  is,  between  the  two  speculations  which,  on 
the  whole,  is  the  most  in  accordance  with  the  general 
principles  of  Scripture  and  the  suggestions  of  the  Christian 
consciousness  ?  This  question  each  must  answer  for  him- 
self, or,  if  he  will,  refuse  to  answer  it  and  maintain  the 
silence  of  faith.  Thank  God,  Christians  can  differ  upon 
this  point  and  still  be  loyal  Christians,  humbly  submissive 
to  the  teachings  of  revelation.  Let  every  man  be  per- 
suaded in  his  own  mind  ;  let  every  man  be  tolerant  of  the 
speculations  of  others,  remembering  the  ignorance.  One 
thing  we  all  know,  that  God  is  love,  and  on  that  knowl- 
edge we  must  all  rest,  like  the  trusting  child  on  its 
mother's  bosom. 

Finally,  let  us  remember  that  the  intermediate  state — 
as  the  name  implies — is  not  the  final  state.  It  is  pro- 
visional and  expectant.  In  comparison  with  what  is  to  be, 
it  is  an  imperfect  state.  Even  the  blessed  ones  in  heaven 
have  not  been  perfected.  God  has  better  things  in  store 
for  them. 


XXYII. 

THE   DAY   OF   THE  LORD 

There  is  a  marked  difference  between  the  attitude  of 
Cliristians  to-day  and  that  of  the  early  ciinrch  toward  the 
great  subjects  of  eschatology.  Our  thoughts  are  concerned 
chiefly  with  the  life  after  death  and  the  condition  of  in- 
dividuals in  it — where  the  departed  are,  whether  they  are 
conscious,  wdiether  they  are  in  the  company  of  those  who 
liave  gone  before,  what  their  activities  are,  how  much 
knowledge  they  have  about  tliis  world  and  how  much 
communication  with  it,  whether  there  is  probation  or 
development  in  the  other  world.  The  early  Christians, 
under  the  fresh  impulse  of  Christ's  teachings  and  those 
of  his  inspired  apostles,  turned  their  thoughts  chiefly  to 
the  earthly  future  of  God's  kingdom,  and  especially  to 
tliat  great  crisis  by  which  the  present  order  of  things  is 
to  be  brought  to  a  close  and  the  eternal  order  establislied. 
It  was  but  seldom,  if  we  can  judge  from  the  New  Testa- 
ment, that  they  raised  any  questions  respecting  the  state 
after  death,  and  then  only  that  they  might  be  sure  that 
those  who  died  in  the  Lord  before  the  great  consumma- 
tion would  be  kept  in  happy  communion  with  the  Saviour 
and  brought  with  him  at  his  second  coming  to  take  part 
in  the  solemn  scenes  of  the  last  day,  and  share  in  the 
glory  and  blessedness  of  the  final  and  eternal  state.  Their 
thought  was  not  so  much  of  the  individual  as  of  the 
church  and  of  the  kingdom. 

We  need  to  put  tlie  emphasis  where  it  was  placed  by 
the  first  Christians.     In  order  that  this  should  be  done,  it 


THE   BAY    OF    THE    LORD  503 

is  not  needful  that  we  should  lay  less  stress  than  we  do 
upon  the  condition  of  the  individual  in  the  intermediate 
state,  but  that  we  should  recognize  the  fact  that  the  inter- 
mediate state  is  a  teniporary  and  subordinate  order  of 
things  and  must  give  way  to  a  higher  order,  and  that  the 
goal  toward  which  human  history,  and  the  history,  if  we 
may  call  it  such,  of  the  unseen  world  of  the  life  beyond 
are  alike  tending,  is  the  eternal  state  which  is  to  be  ushered 
in  by  the  last  day.  In  this  point  of  burning  light  the  two 
lines,  the  one  from  below  and  the  other  from  above,  find 
their  meeting-point. 

The  importance  of  this  readjustment  of  emphasis  is  ap- 
parent as  soon  as  we  consider  the  subject.  Christianity  is 
a  historical  religion.  The  kingdom  of  God  is  a  develop- 
ment. It  is  to  come  by  a  process  and  to  come  on  this 
earth.  This  planet,  so  scarred  and  seared  by  sin,  is  to  be 
redeemed.  The  earth  is  to  be  filled  with  the  knowledge 
of  the  glory  of  Jehovah,  as  the  waters  cover  the  sea  (Ilab. 
ii.  14).  The  chief  end  of  Christ's  redemptive  work  and  of 
our  labor  for  the  kingdom  is  not — as  we  have  had  occa- 
sion more  than  once  to  observe — to  get  men  safe  out 
of  this  world  into  the  blessedness  of  the  other,  impor- 
tant though  this  is,  and  necessary  as  a  means  to  the  great 
end  ;  rather  it  is  to  bring  the  whole  earth  itself  under  the 
sway  of  the  Lord  and  His  Christ.  Then,  and  then  only, 
can  the  eternal  order  of  things  begin.  "  The  world  for 
God  and  Christ  !"  is  the  true  battle-cry  of  Christendom. 
We  find  the  right  relation  of  things  indicated  in  the  Apoc- 
alj^pse,  where  all  heaven,  the  angels  and  the  redeemed, 
are  represented  as  eagerly  watching  and  even  taking  part 
in  the  struggle  of  the  militant  church.  Our  longings, 
our  liopes  should  reach  forward  along  the  line  of  the 
earthly  history  of  the  kingdom  to  the  triumph  which  is  to 
begin  with  the  last  day.  It  may  seem  as  if  in  this  way  of 
looking  at  it  the  individual  becomes  of  no  importance  and 
the  whole  stress  is  laid  upon  the  general,  upon  the  race, 


504  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

and  tlie  clinrcli.  But  tliis  is  only  seeming.  The  truth  is 
that  the  individual  is  to  find  his  consummation  only  in 
connection  with  the  general ;  the  triumpli  of  the  believer 
takes  place  only  in  and  through  the  triumph  of  Christ 
and  the  church.  Until  the  final  glory  is  revealed  and  the 
body  of  Christ  is  perfected  there  is  imperfection  in  the 
state  of  every  individual  believer,  whether  in  this  world  or 
the  other.  The  social  principle,  whicli  plays  so  important 
a  part  at  every  stage  in  the  development  of  humanity, 
finds  its  complete  realization  in  the  glory  of  the  trium- 
phant church  of  the  future,  the  Bride  of  Christ,  The 
author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  said,  speaking  of  the 
relation  of  the  Old  Testament  saints  to  the  Christian 
church,  "  These  all,  having  had  witness  borne  to  them 
through  their  faith,  received  not  the  promise,  God  liaving 
provided  some  better  thing  concerning  us,  that  apart 
from  ns  they  should  not  be  made  perfect "  (Ileb.  xi,  39, 
40).  Similar  language  might  be  nsed  with  reference  to 
the  relation  of  the  individual  Christian  to  tlie  chuich  ; 
the  promise,  the  better  thing,  the  perfecting,  belongs  to 
the  whole,  and  to  the  individual  only  in  connection  with 
the  whole.  There  is  no  selfish  individualism  in  the  king- 
dom of  God. 

I  shall  speak  in  this  chapter  of  the  "  day  of  the  Lord," 
the  great  crisis  which  ushers  in  the  final  state.  I  shall 
first  consider  the  principles  upon  which  the  Kew  Testa- 
ment prophecies  respecting  this  subject  are  to  be  inter- 
preted, next  point  out  the  course  of  the  history  of  the 
kingdom  leading  np  to  the  last  day,  including  the  subject 
of  the  Millennium,  and  then  take  up  the  three  great  events 
of  the  day  itself,  the  second  coming  of  Christ,  the  resur- 
rection, and  the  last  judgment, 

I.  It  is  of  great  importance  that  we  should  know  how 
to  interpret  the  l^ew  Testament  prophecies  respecting  the 
last  day.  At  the  best  there  is  in  every  pi-ediction,  so  long 
as  it  is  unfulfilled,  an  insoluble  element.     But  if  wrong 


THE   DAY    OF   THE   LOUD  505 

principles  of  interpretation  are  applied  to  it,  tlie  whole 
prediction  becomes  worse  than  insoluble  ;  it  is  absolutely 
misleading.  Frophec}''  is  a  species  of  revelation.  It  aims 
to  make  known  important  truth,  needful  for  the  guidance 
of  God's  children.  It  must  always  be  a  great  misfortune 
to  miss  the  truth  it  is  intended  to  teach. 

There  is  a  large  body  of  New  Testament  prophecy  re- 
lating to  the  subject  before  us;  indeed  all  New  Testament 
prophecy  is  either  directly  or  indirectly  connected  with  it. 
Christ  was  constantly  referring  to  the  last  day  and  its 
events  in  his  public  teachings,  as  well  as  in  his  more  pri- 
vate conversations  with  his  disciples.  He  made  it  the 
subject  of  one  of  his  most  extended  discourses,  namely, 
that  recorded  in  the  twenty-fourth  and  twenty-fifth  chap- 
ters of  Matthew  and  the  pai-allel  passages  in  Mark  and 
Luke.  It  is  a  theme  which  continually  recurs  in  the  apos- 
tolic epistles.     It  is  the  chief  subject  of  the  Apocalypse. 

Now  there  seems  to  be  an  unconquerable  dualism,  not 
to  say  self-contradiction,  in  these  predictions.  Our  Savi- 
our connects  his  second  coming  now  with  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem,  now  with  the  end  of  human  history.  The 
last  judgment  is  soleinnly  predicted  as  to  come  at  the  end 
of  the  world,  but  it  is  also  declared  that  it  will  come  dur- 
ing the  lifetime  of  some  of  the  disciples  (Matt.  xiii.  24- 
30,  36-43  ;  x.  23  ;  xvi.  27,  28).  In  the  great  eschatological 
discourse  in  Matthew  (chaps,  xxiv.,  xxv.),  and  parallel 
passages  in  Mark  and  Luke,  both  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem and  the  end  of  the  world  are  evidently  alluded  to, 
but  no  exegesis  has  yet  succeeded  in  separating  the  two, 
although  innumerable  attempts  have  been  made.  The 
confusion  is  made  greater  by  the  assurance  of  the  Saviour 
that  "  of  that  day  and  hour  knoweth  no  one,  not  even 
the  angels  of  heaven,  neither  the  Son,  but  the  Father  only  " 
(Matt.  xxiv.  36  ;  Mark  xiii.  32).  The  apostles  connect 
the  last  day  and  its  solemn  scenes  exclusively  with  the  end 
of  the  woi'ld,  but  they  evidently  expect  its  advent  during 


506  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

their  own  lifetime  (Pliil.  i.  6,  iv.  5 ;  2  Cor.  v.  1-10  ; 
1  Thess.  iv.  15  ;  Ileb.  x.  25  ;  1  Pet.  i.  5,  iv.  7 ;  James 
V.  8  ;  1  Jolin  ii.  18).  In  the  Revelation  tlie  time  is  rep- 
resented as  at  hand,  the  coming  of  Clirist  as  in  the 
immediate  future  {Rev.  i.  1,  3,  7,  xxii.  6,  7,  12,  20) ; 
and  is  connected  with  the  downfall  of  the  persecut- 
ing Roman  and  Jewish  powers.  But  at  the  same  time 
it  teaches  that  before  the  resurrection,  iinal  judgment,  and 
end  of  the  world,  there  is  to  be  a  thousand  years  of  rest, 
during  which  Satan  will  be  bound. 

It  is  not  strange  that  the  facts,  standing  just  as  they  are, 
liave  led  to  many  widely  diverse  conclusions.  Unbelievers 
have  triumphantly  pointed  to  the  discrepancy'  as  an  undeni- 
able proof  of  the  fallibility  of  so-called  revelation.  Many 
believing  scholars  have  tried  to  refer  everything  to  the 
far-off  end  of  the  world.  A  class  of  theologians  now 
somewliat  extensively  represented,  though  not  generally 
recognized  as  orthodox,  have  insisted  that  the  last  day  was 
the  end  of  the  Jewish  dispensation,  that  Christ's  coming 
was  not  so  much  a  coming  as  a  presence — a  view  which 
i-eceives  a  color  of  plansibility  from  the  fact  that  the 
Greek  word  translated  coming,  pa7'ousia,  literally  means  a 
presence — and  was  his  spiritual  presence  in  the  world 
since  his  ascension.  According  to  this  view,  there  is  no 
future  general  resurrection  and  judgment,  but  resurrec- 
tion is  the  clothing  of  the  soul  at  death  with  a  spiritual 
body,  while  the  only  judgment  is  the  so-called  particular 
judgment  which  takes  place  when  the  soul  enters  the  other 
world.  The  future  of  the  kingdom  of  God  is  thus  left 
outside  the  view  of  prophecy. 

The  difficulty  disappears  when  we  apply  the  right  prin- 
ciples of  interpretation.  Fortunately  those  principles  are 
to  be  found  in  the  Bible  itself.  The  Old  Testament  pre- 
dictions are  in  large  measure  fulfilled  in  the  events  of  the 
N^ew  Testament,  and  we  are  able  to  gather  from  the  com- 
parison of  prediction  and  fulfilment  the  divinely   estab- 


THE   DAY   OF   THE   LORD  507 

lislied  relation  l)etvveeii  the  two.  Now  we  find  tliat  the 
larger  number  of  the  prophecies  are  not  the  predictions  of 
single  future  events,  so  that  they  are — to  use  a  phrase 
that  has  been  frequently  employed — history  befoi'e  the 
event.  Rather  the  prophecy  deals  with  the  pragmatism  of 
history,  the  relation  of  its  causes  to  its  effect.  It  I'e veals 
a  principle  or  law  or  agency  gradually  working  out  its 
result.  Thus  the  prophecj^  of  the  redemptive  work  of 
Christ  is  the  revelation  of  the  consummation  of  the  divine 
principle  of  redemption  already  working  in  the  world. 
The  prophecy  of  the  Messiah  looks  to  the  complete  fulfil- 
ment of  the  personal  mediatorial  principle,  which  appears 
in  operation  in  the  earliest  stages  of  the  redemptive  reve- 
lation. It  is  thus  that  persons  and  events  connected  with 
the  process  of  working  out  these  principles  become  types 
of  the  persons  and  events  in  which  the  principles  culmi- 
nate. The  redemption  of  God's  people  from  Egypt  is  a 
type  of  the  spiritual  redemption  through  Christ.  Canaan 
is  a  type  of  heaven.  The  judgments  of  God  upon  the 
heathen  nations  and  Israel  are  types  of  the  last  judgment. 
The  one  great  cause,  God's  redemptive  providence,  follow- 
ing a  certain  method  or  law,  gives  rise  to  all  these  events 
and  unites  them  together.  So  the  prophets,  priests,  and 
kings  of  the  Old  Dispensation  are  types  of  Christ,  since 
they  all  manifest  the  working  of  the  same  redemptive 
principle  which  found  its  complete  realization  and  embodi- 
ment in  him. 

Now  prophecy  does  not  always,  or  even  commonly, 
reach  directly  across  the  course  of  history  and  lay  hold 
upon  the  last  things.  It  is  wont  to  open  up  some- 
thing of  the  course  that  history  is  to  follow,  and  to  find  a 
resting-place,  before  it  goes  on  to  the  goal,  in  some  com- 
paratively near  though  partial  fulfilment  of  the  principle 
it  is  concerned  with.  Thus  to  a  great  extent  prophecy  is 
typical ;  it  has  a  primarj'-,  but  partial  fulfilment  in  the 
type,  and  this  very  partiality  points  on  to  the  complete 


508  PEESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

fiillilment  in  the  antitype.  It  has,  to  use  the  happy 
phrase  of  Lord  Bacon,  "springing  and  germinant  accom- 
plishment.'" The  second  Psahn  lias  its  primary  accom- 
plishment in  some  monarch  of  the  Davidic  line,  who  is  a 
type  of  the  Messiah  ;  but  he  only  very  partially  and 
meagrely  satisfies  the  conditions  of  the  prediction,  and  the 
unfulfilled  remainder  carries  our  thoughts  on  to  the  com- 
plete fulfilment  in  the  great  Son  of  David.  The  prophets 
are  continually  predicting  the  great  redemption  of  IsVael, 
and  the  prediction  finds  a  typical  and  partial  fulfilment  in 
the  deliverance  of  Israel  from  the  impending  danger  or 
restoration  from  the  existing  captivity,  but  only  that  the 
great  deliverance  of  the  future  may  appear  the  more  dis- 
tinctly. There  thus  arises  what  has  been  sometimes 
called  "  the  perspective  of  prophecy  ; "  events  widely  sepa- 
rated from  each  other  but  connected  by  a  common  princi- 
ple, and  so  typical  and  antitypical  are  represented  in  a 
single  view,  with  no  clear  line  of  demarcation  between 
them  and  no  indication  of  the  long  periods  of  time  which 
separate  them.  It  is  as  when  we  see  before  us  what  seems 
to  be  a  single  range  of  mountains,  but  which  turns  out  as 
we  advance  to  be  several  ranges  widely  separated  from 
each  other.  In  this  way  the  two  advents  of  Christ  are 
represented  in  the  Old  Testament  as  one,  and  it  was  im- 
possible until  the  Christ  came  to  discover  that  ages  lay 
between  the  two ;  but  the  two  stand  in  the  closest  prag- 
matic relation,  and  the  first  coming  is  the  type  of  the  sec- 
ond. So  the  Old  Testament  fails  to  distinguish  between 
the  founding  of  the  Messiah's  kingdom,  which  took  place 
in  and  through  the  Christ  of  the  humiliation,  and  the  con- 
summation of  the  kingdom  with  which  the  present  order 
of  things  is  to  terminate. 

Such  is  the  nature  of  Old  Testament  prophecy,  and 
there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  the  prophecies  of  the 
New  Testament  essentially  differ  in  their  character.  In 
many  cases,  it  is  true,  there  are  direct  predictions  of  the 


THE   DAY    OF   THE    LORD  509 

last  things,  but  in  many  other  cases  the  final  fulfilment  is 
mediated  by  a  near  and  partial  fulfilment,  which  is  typi- 
cal of  the  final.  There  is  also  commonly  the  same  disre- 
gard of  the  intervening  time. 

Isow  the  event  which  our  Saviour  chose  as  the  type  of 
the  last  day,  and  as  the  partial  realization  and  the  illustra- 
tion of  his  redemption  in  its  aspects  both  of  mercy  and 
judgment,  was  the  overthrow  of  the  Hebrew  common- 
wealth, and  more  particularly  the  event  in  which  this 
overthrow  was  consummated,  the  destruction  of  Jerusa- 
lem. This  was  to  the  Jew  the  solemn  and  formal  termi- 
nation of  the  Old  Dispensation,  with  its  ceremonial  law 
and  its  theocratic  institutions.  It  was  a  true  "  end  of  the 
the  age  ''  {avvTeXeia  rod  alcovo<;),  namely,  of  the  age  of 
the  Old  Covenant,  and  a  type  of  the  end  of  the  world-age. 
The  disciples,  brought  up  as  Jews  and  taught  from  their 
childhood  to  accept  literally  the  Old  Testament  teachings 
respecting  the  perpetuity  of  the  law  and  the  nation,  could 
scarcely  have  been  more  surprised  at  the  end  of  the  world 
than  at  this  ending  of  the  Old  Dispensation.  The  coming 
of  the  Christ  in  power  to  bring  about  this  result  was  well 
fitted  to  be  a  type  of  the  final  personal  and  outward  com- 
ing in  glory  to  bring  in  the  final  triumph  of  the  kingdom. 
The  judgment  involved  in  it  was  the  type  of  the  last 
judgment.  It  is  not  saying  too  much  even  to  intimate 
that  the  resurrection  of  the  Christian  cause,  cast  down  by 
the  oppression  of  Jewish  persecution,  was  the  type  of  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead  on  the  last  day. 

Accordingly,  the  Saviour  portrayed  on  one  canvas  the 
two  series  of  events,  making  no  clear  distinction  between 
them.  In  the  foreground  was  the  impending  overthrow 
of  Judaism  and  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ;  gleaming 
forth  behind  it,  in  solenm  and  awful  grandeur,  was  the 
last  day,  with  its  attendant  events  of  the  Saviour's  coming, 
the  resurrection,  the  judgment,  and  the  end  of  the  world- 
age.     The  ages  of  intervening  time  did  not  appear.     To 


510  PRESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

those  who  first  gazed  upon  the  picture  the  whole  seemed 
to  be  a  single  group  of  events.  Only  as  time  went  on, 
and  the  first  series  of  events  transpired,  did  it  become  evi- 
dent how  much  lay  still  beyond.  The  world  in  its  history 
must  reach  the  summit  of  the  nearer  ridge  before  it  could 
be  known  that  the  peaks,  which  seemed  to  rise  imme- 
diately behind,  were  far  away.  But  when  the  first  resting- 
place  was  reached,  it  was  intended  to  be  a  pledge  and  as- 
surance that  the  goal  would  be  attained  in  due  time.  The 
same  mighty  power  that  brought  about  the  redemption  of 
the  church  by  the  overthrow  of  Judaism  would  surely 
bring  about  the  redemption  of  the  end,  with  its  judgments 
and  its  glorious  consummation. 

We  have  seen  that  the  Saviour  himself  confessed  his 
ignorance  of  the  day  and  hour  of  his  second  coming.  The 
reason  is  not  far  to  seek.  There  is  always  a  conditional 
element  in  prophecy.  God's  redemption  is  wrought  out 
through  the  agency  of  men.  It  is  certain  of  accomplish- 
ment. But  the  speed  with  which  the  process  will  advance 
depends  upon  the  faithfulness  and  zeal  of  the  human  in- 
struments. "When  we  pray  to-day,  "  Thy  kingdom  come," 
and  beseech  the  Lord  not  to  delay  His  advent,  we  are 
prone  to  forget  that  we  can  do  much  to  hasten  the  con- 
summation. Now  God  through  His  omniscience  com- 
passes even  the  results  of  human  freedom,  and  has  given 
a  place  to  them  in  His  eternal  decree.  The  Father's  fore- 
knowledge is  cognizant  of  the  daj'  and  the  hour.  But  it 
was  hidden  from  the  God-man  in  his  state  of  hunnliation, 
since  it  was  conditioned  upon  human  freedom.  How 
much  he  knew  we  cannot  tell.  But  we  must  accept  his 
own  assurance  that  he  did  not  know  all.  It  may  be  that 
if  the  mass  of  the  Jewish  people  had  accepted  Christ,  the 
end  of  the  old  Judaism  and  the  end  of  the  world  would 
have  been  synchronous. 

The  state  of  things  behig  such,  we  cannot  wonder  that 
even  inspired  apostles  did  not  fully  understand  the  Savi- 


THE    DAY    OF   THE   LORD  511 

oiir's  prophecies.  They  saw  what  was  near,  and  judged 
that  the  end  was  near.  If  Christ  distinctly  disavowed  a 
knowledge  of  tlie  times  and  seasons,  we  need  not  be  sur- 
prised that  the  disciples  knew  even  less  than  the  Master, 
They  had  the  principle  in  their  possession,  but  were  able 
only  partially  to  apply  it.  We  greatly  misapprehend  the 
nature  of  prophecy  when  we  say  that  the  apostles  were 
mistaken  in  their  expectation  of  the  speedy  coming  of  the 
last  day.  There  is  a  nearness  in  days  and  years,  and  there 
is  a  nearness  in  the  relation  of  cause  and  effect.  In  the 
first  sense  the  last  day  was  not  near.  In  the  latter  sense 
it  was  ;  the  causes  which  were  certainly  to  bring  about 
the  end  were  already  visible  working ;  a  great  crisis  was 
approaching,  which  was  at  once  an  end  and  the  beginning 
of  the  end.  In  the  Apocalypse  we  see  the  history  of  the 
kingdom  advancing ;  the  overthrow  of  the  persecuting 
Jewish  and  heathen  powers  was  immediately  impending, 
and  the  inspired  apostle,  as  he  reached  the  summit  of  the 
first  mountain  range,  beheld  the  view  opening  beyond,  the 
thousand  years  of  Christian  progress,  and  on  the  other  side 
the  lofty  heights  of  the  consummation. 

II.  Our  next  topic  is  the  course  of  events  leading  up  to 
the  last  day.  Let  us  take  up  the  more  important  of  these 
events  in  succession. 

1.  First  among  them  we  may  mention  the  overthrow  of 
the  persecuting  Jewish  and  Roman  powers,  to  which  al- 
lusion has  just  been  made.  Besides  our  Saviour's  prophecy 
of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  the  first  nineteen  chapters 
of  the  Apocalypse  are  devoted  to  these  events,  which  were 
to  give  the  divine  seal  of  approbation  to  the  cause  of  the 
Crucified,  and  which  are  represented  as  engaging  the  su- 
preme interest  of  the  blessed  ones  in  heaven.  The  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem  and  the  surrender  of  the  haughty 
Roman  powei",  in  the  person  of  Constantino,  to  Christ  were 
the  two  events  which  signalized  the  fulfilment  of  these 
predictions. 


512  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

2.  Next  let  us  consider  the  progress  of  the  kingdom. 
Our  Saviour  dealt  with  this  subject  somewhat  fully  in  his 
parables  of  the  kingdom.  The  growth  of  the  wheat,  of 
the  grain  of  mustard-seed  and  the  great  tree  which  pro- 
ceeds from  it,  the  spread  of  the  leaven  in  the  meal,  are 
the  figures  by  which  he  illustrated  and  predicted  the  his- 
tory of  his  cause  in  the  woi-ld  (Matt.  xiii.  24-33).  The 
work  was  to  go  steadily  forward  until  the  whole  earth  with 
all  its  peoples  and  institutions  should  be  brought  under  the 
sway  of  Christ. 

This  brings  us  to  speak  of  the  Millennium.  Probably 
many  Christians  would  be  surprised  to  be  told  that  this 
much-discussed  period  is  mentioned  only  once  in  the  Bible  ; 
but  this  is  the  fact.  There  are,  it  is  true,  many  passages, 
both  in  the  Old  and  the  New  Testaments,  which  predict 
a  time  when  Christianity  will  attain  a  general  prevalence ; 
some  of  them  i-efer  to  the  beginnings,  some  to  the  con- 
summation of  the  Christian  Dispensation,  some  are  wholly 
indefinite  (Is.  xi.  6-9,  xxxv.,  Ix.,  Ixv.  20  ;  Zech.  ix.  9, 
10,  xii.  10 ;  Mic.  iv.  1-4 ;  Matt.  xiii.  31,  32 ;  Luke 
xix.  11  seq.).  But  it  is  only  in  the  twentieth  of  the  Rev- 
elation (vv.  1-10)  that  the  period  of  a  thousand  years, 
or  Millennium  is  referred  to.  The  passage  is  as  follows 
(Rev.  Yers.) : 

"  And  I  saw  an  angel  coming  down  out  of  heaven,  having 
the  key  of  the  abyss  and  a  great  chain  in  his  hand.  And 
he  laid  hold  on  the  dragon,  the  old  serpent,  which  is  the 
Devil  and  Satan,  and  bound  him  for  a  thousand  years, 
and  cast  him  into  the  abyss,  and  shut  it,  and  sealed  it  over 
him,  that  he  should  deceive  the  nations  no  more,  until  the 
thousand  years  should  be  finished  ;  after  this  he  must  be 
loosed  for  a  little  time. 

"And  I  saw  thrones,  and  they  sat  upon  them,  and 
judgment  was  given  unto  them  :  and  I  saw  the  souls  of 
them  that  had  been  beheaded  for  the  testimony  of  Jesus, 
and  for  the  word  of  God,  and  such  as  worshipped  not  the 
beast,  neither  his  image,  and  received  not  the  mark  upon 


THE   DAY    OF    THE    LORD  513 

their  forehead  and  upon  their  hand ;  and  they  lived  and 
reigned  with  Christ  a  tliousand  yeai'S.  The  rest  of  the 
dead  lived  not  until  the  thousand  years  should  be  finished. 
This  is  the  first  resurrection.  Blessed  and  holy  is  he 
that  hath  part  in  the  first  resurrection :  over  these  the 
second  death  hath  no  power ;  but  they  shall  be  priests 
of  God  and  of  Christ,  and  shall  reign  with  him  a  thou- 
sand years. 

"  And  when  the  thousand  years  are  finislied,  Satan 
shall  be  loosed  out  of  his  prison,  and  shall  come  forth  to 
deceive  the  nations  which  are  in  the  four  corners  of  the 
earth,  Gog  and  Magog,  to  gather  them  together  to  the 
war  :  the  number  of  whom  is  as  the  sand  of  the  sea.  And 
they  went  up  over  the  breadth  of  the  earth,  and  compassed 
the  camp  of  the  saints  about,  and  the  beloved  city :  and 
fire  came  down  out  of  heaven,  and  devoured  them.  And 
the  devil  that  deceived  them  was  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire 
and  brimstone,  where  are  also  the  beast  and  the  false 
prophet ;  and  they  shall  be  tormented  day  and  night  for- 
ever and  ever." 

It  would,  of  course,  be  impossible  in  this  chapter  to  give 
a  full  explanation  of  this  difficult  and  disputed  passage.  I 
can  only  briefly  speak  of  the  theories  which  have  arisen 
from  the  different  interpretations  of  it. 

The  first  of  these  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Premillennial 
Coming  of  Christ.  This  was  widely  held  in  the  early 
Christian  church,  especially  by  the  sect  of  the  Montan- 
ists,  who  through  their  excesses  brought  it  into  disrepute. 
It  was  revived  by  the  Anabaptists  in  the  days  of  the  Ref- 
ormation, and  is  held  at  the  present  time  by  the  Second 
Adventists  and  by  not  a  few  excellent  men  in  our  evangel- 
ical denominations.  The  fnndamental  belief  of  the  Pre- 
millenarians  is  that  Christ  is  to  return  at  some  time  in  the 
near  future  and  establish  an  outward  and  glorious  king- 
dom on  earth.  At  his  coming  the  saints  are  to  be  raised 
from  the  dead  and  share  with  him  in  the  government  of 
the  world.  The  seat  of  this  kingdom  is  to  be  the  holy 
city,  Jerusalem.  During  this  period  the  Jews  are  to  be 
33 


« 
514  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

converted  and  bionglit  back  to  their  own  land.  The 
greater  part  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth  are  also  to  be 
converted  and  the  time  is  to  be  one  of  universal  peace  and 
blessedness.  It  is  to  last  a  thousand  years,  at  the  close  of 
which  period  the  powers  of  evil  are  to  be  let  loose  for  a 
time  and  to  unite  in  one  final  assault  upon  the  saints  and 
the  holy  city,  but  are  to  be  destroyed  by  the  power  of 
Christ.  Then  will  come  the  second  resurrection,  namely, 
of  the  wicked,  to  be  followed  by  the  last  judgment  and 
the  final  awards. 

I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  the  theory  is  held  in  pre- 
cisely this  form  by  all  its  advocates,  but  only  that  this  is 
a  fairly  representative  statement  of  it.  The  doctrine  un- 
doubtedly has  in  its  favor  the  literal  interpretation  of  the 
passage  in  question,  but  it  involves  elements  nowhere  else 
presented  in  the  Bible.  The  double  resurrection  seems 
excluded  by  the  teachings  of  our  Saviour  and  the  apostles, 
and  they  nowhere  intimate  that  so  long  a  period  is  to 
intervene  between  the  Saviour's  coming  and  the  judg- 
ment ;  on  the  contrary,  they  group  these  events  together 
as  parts  of  the  last  day.  Moreover,  the  fanaticism  and 
excess  which  have  been  associated,  with  this  view  have 
created  among  sober  Christian  thinkers  a  well-founded 
prejudice  against  it.  In  saying  this,  I  mean  nothing  to 
the  detriment  of  the  very  excellent  men  who  favor  it  to  a 
greater  or  less  extent. 

The  other  view,  which  has  been  commonly  held  in  the 
Christian  church,  is  that  the  Millennium  is  a  period  pre- 
ceding the  second  coming  of  Christ  during  which  Chris- 
tianity is  generally  to  prevail  and  the  principles  of  the 
Gospel  to  be  recognized.  It  is  not  a  period  of  precisely  a 
thousand  j-ears,  but  one  of  indefinite  duration — the  num- 
ber one  thousand,  the  cube  oH  ten,  being  the  symbol  of 
perfection,  and  designating  the  period  as  one  of  great 
prosperity  and  blessedness.  During  this  time  Christ  is  to 
reign,  not  in  visible' personal  presence  but   through  the 


THE   DAY   OF   THE   LORD  515 

Holy  Spirit  and  the  comiiiou  methods  of  the  kingdom. 
This  view  abandons  the  strictly  literal  interpretation  of 
Ivev.  XX.  1-10,  and  recognizes  the  fact  that  there  is  a 
figurative  and  symbolical  element  in  the  prophecy,  corre- 
sponding to  the  general  character  of  the  book  in  which  it 
occurs.  The  binding  of  Satan  indicates  the  suppression 
of  evil  and  the  general  prevalence  of  the  principles  of  the 
Gospel  during  the  millennial  period.  The  first  resurrection 
(in  full  accordance  with  Ezek.  xxxvii.  1-14,  which  the 
apostle  most  probably  had  in  mind)  is  to  be  understood 
as  referring  to  the  revival  on  earth  of  the  cause  and  spirit 
of  the  martyrs  (or  perhaps  to  a  raising  of  the  souls  of  tlie 
martyrs  to  a  place  of  especial  dignitj'  and  authority  in  the 
heavenly  world),  while  only  the  second  resurrection  is  to 
be  understood  as  a  physical  one.  This  interpretation  is 
not  without  its  difiiculties,  but  they  are  far  fewer  and  less 
embarrassing  than  those  which  arise  if  the  other  view  be 
adopted. 

It  is  connnon  among  those  who  hold  the  view  just  re- 
ferred to  to  regard  the  millennium  as  still  in  the  future. 
But  there  are  not  a  few  reasons  why  the  theory  of 
Augustine  ("  De  Civ.  Dei."  lib.  xx.,  c.  9)  commends  itself, 
that  the  thousand  years  is  the  period  of  the  success  and 
prevalence  of  Christianity,  and  has  been  in  progress  since 
the  conclusion  of  the  days  of  persecution.  This  is  a  time 
during  which  Satan  is,  relatively  speaking,  bound,  and  the 
cause  of  the  martyrs,  which  is  the  cause  of  Christ,  trium- 
phant. If  it  be  objected  that  such  a  view  deprives  us 
of  the  Millennium  altogether  iu  the  sense  in  which  the 
term  has  been  immemorially  understood  in  the  church, 
my  answer  is,  that  it  only  antedates  the  beginning  of  it, 
while  we  may  still  hope  that  there  is  in  store  for  us  before 
the  Master's  coming  such  a  time  of  universal  Christianity 
as  the  church  has  been  wont  to  expect.  The  kingdom  of 
God  is  to  go  steadily  on  its  way,  not  indeed  without  great 
convulsions  and  even  retrogressions,  but  still,  on  the  whole, 


616  PRESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

with  nnliiiidered  progress,  until  he  come  whose  right  the 
kingdom  is. 

3.  There  are  a  number  of  passages  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment wliich  lead  us  to  conclude  that  at  some  time  before 
the  second  coming  of  Christ,  and  opening  the  way  for  it, 
there  is  to  be  a  grand  final  massing  of  the  powers  of  evil, 
perhaps  connected  with  a  temporarj'  release  of  the  super- 
natural powers  of  evil,  under  a  personal  head  called  the 
Antichrist.  This  is  to  result  in  a  short  and  terrible  con- 
flict, issuing  in  the  utter  overthrow  of  these  enemies  of 
Christ.  Of  this  final  struggle  the  effoi'ts  of  the  persecuting 
Jewish  and  Roman  powers  against  the  early  church  are 
the  type  and  the  prophecy.  The  first  great  personal  type 
was  the  Emperor  Kero.  (See  2  Thess.  ii.  3  seq ;  1  John 
ii.  18,  22,  iv.  3 ;  2  John  7  ;  Matt.  xxiv.  24 ;  1  Tim.  iv. 
1  ;  Rev.  chaps,  xiv.-xvi.,  xx.  7-10.)  Since  the  Reforma- 
tion Protestants  liave  been  accustomed  to  identify  the 
Papacy  with  the  Antichrist.  The  Westminster  Confession 
of  Faith  expressly  calls  the  Pope  b}'  this  name.  But  the 
most  that  can  be  said  is,  that  the  Papacy,  so  far  as  it  has 
persecuted  the  true  church,  is  a  type  of  Antichrist.  The 
complete  fulfilment  of  the  prophec}'  is  still  to  come.  The 
Roman  Catholic  religion,  great  as  are  its  errors,  is  not 
anti-Christian. 

4.  The  conversion  of  the  heathen  is  another  of  the  great 
facts  of  prophec}'.  It  is  taught  in  the  Old  Testament  and 
also  in  the  New.  Our  Saviour  gave  to  the  church  the 
commission  to  go  into  all  the  world  and  make  disciples  of 
all  the  nations,  to  preach  the  Gospel  to  every  creature, 
with  the  assurance  that  all  authority  had  been  given  to 
him  on  earth  and  in  heaven,  and  the  promise  that  he 
would  be  with  his  followers  even  to  the  end  of  the  world- 
age  (Matt,  xxviii.  18-20;  Mark  xvi.  15,  16;  Luke  xxiv. 
47-49).  He  declared  that  this  commission  should  be  ful- 
filled (Matt.  xxiv.  14;  Mark  xiii.  10;  Acts  i.  8).  The 
Christian  church  has  therefore  from  the  first  been  a  mis 


THE   DAY   OF   THE   LORD  517 

sionary  chnrch.  Its  work  is  to  cai-ry  forward  the  work  of 
the  khigdoiii  until  the  whole  earth  has  been  brought  under 
the  Saviour's  sway.  The  result  is  finally  to  be  reached, 
through  the  power  of  God  working  by  means  of  human 
instrumentalities.  The  fulness  of  the  Gentiles  is  to  be 
brought  into  the  kingdom. 

5.  Nor  are  God's  chosen  people  to  be  forever  cast  off. 
This  is  distinctly  taught  in  the  eleventh  chapter  of  Romans. 
"  The  gifts  and  the  calling  of  God  are  without  repentance" 
(ver.  29).  "  A  hardening  in  part  hath  befallen  Israel,  until 
the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles  be  come  in ;  and  so  all  Israel 
shall  be  saved  "  (vv.  25,  26).  So  much  is  implied  in  the 
fulfilment  of  the  Old  Testament  prophecies.  We  are  not 
indeed  to  understand,  as  many  do,  that  the  Jews  are  to  be 
restored  to  their  political  power.  That  would  be  opposed 
to  the  spiritual  character  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  What 
is  promised  is  that  the  Jews  shall  be  brought  back  once 
more  into  the  divine  favor,  and  receive  the  salvation  which 
they  have  for  the  time  being  thrust  from  them.  The  won- 
derful fact  of  history  is  the  preservation  of  the  Jews  amid 
all  the  vicissitudes  which  have  befallen  them,  and  we  can- 
not doubt  that  it  points  to  the  fulfilment  of  the  Scripture 
promises. 

III.  We  come  now  to  the  events  of  the  last  day^  and 
first  of  all  we  consider  the  great  event  which  ushers  in  the 
daj'',  namely,  the  second  coming  of  Christ.  This  is  the 
great  fact  toward  which  the  whole  New  Testament  looks, 
the  object  of  the  disciples'  longings  ;  it  is  the  consumma- 
tion of  the  long  historical  process  of  redemption,  the  final 
act  in  the  establishment  of  the  kingdom.  It  appears  on 
the  far-off  edge  of  the  Old  Testament  prophetic  horizon, 
not  clearly  distinguishable  from  the  first  advent,  and  is 
foretold  in  the  predictions  of  the  coming  of  Jehovah  at 
the  last  day  for  judgment  and  redemption  (Is.  xiii.  6-14  ; 
Amos  V.  18-20 ;  Joel  ii.  29-32,  iii.  14-21 ;  Zeph.  i.  14, 
ii.  3  ;  Zech.  xiv.  1-9 ;  Mai.  iii.  2-18,  iv.    1-3).     Only  in 


f)18  PRESENT   DAT   THEOLOGY 

one  remarkable  passage  is  the  coming  of  tlie  Son  of  Man 
distinctly  foretold  (Dan.  vii.  13). 

We  have  seen  that  the  time  was  left  wholly  indefinite, 
hidden  even  from  Christ  himself,  and  so  far  nnknown  to 
the  disciples  that  they  seem  to  have  supposed  that  the 
final  coming  was  to  take  place  during  their  generation.  It 
was  an  event  always  impending,  the  causes  of  which  were 
actively  working  and  might  at  any  time  bring  about  the 
result.  The  great  characteristic  of  the  coming,  constantly 
reiterated  by  Ciirist  and  the  apostles,  was  its  suddenness 
and  unexpectedness,  as  in  the  case  of  its  type  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem.  "  Be  ye  also  ready ;  for  in  an  hour 
that  ye  think  not  the  Son  of  Man  cometh  "  (Luke  xii.  40). 
"  As  the  lightning,  when  it  lighteneth  out  of  the  one  part 
under  the  heaven,  shineth  unto  the  other  part  under 
heaven  ;  so  shall  the  Son  of  Man  be  in  his  day  "  (Luke 
xvii.  24).  The  coming  was  to  be  like  the  coming  of  the 
ilood,  like  the  breaking  in  of  g,  thief  at  night  (Matt.  xxiv. 
36-44).  The  apostles  echo  the  Lord's  words,  "as  a  thief 
in  the  night "  (1  Thess.  v.  2  seq.  ;  2  Pet.  iii.  10). 

The  Saviour  is  to  come  in  his  kinolv  olory.  Befoi'e  the 
coming  he  is  hidden  from  the  eye  of  sense.  His  own 
disciples  walk  by  faith,  not  by  sight.  The  world  does  not 
see  him,  and  men  of  the  world  throw  doubt  upon  his  ex- 
istence, and  ask,  "Where  is  the  promise  of  his  coming?" 
(2  Pet.  iii.  4).  The  coming  is  to  be  the  outward  personal 
manifestation  of  the  gloi'ified  Christ,  his  "  revelation  "  or 
"  manifestation,"  his  aj)Ocalypse  or  epiphany  (1  Coi-.  i.  7 ; 
1  Tim.  vi.  14;  Tit.  ii.  13;  1  Pet.  i.  7,  8).  Then  every 
Qya  shall  see  him,  not  as  he  was  in  his  state  of  humilia- 
tion, but  in  the  glory  of  his  Father.  According  to  the 
prophecy  in  Daniel  he  is  to  come  in  the  clouds  of  heaven 
(Dan.  vii.  13),  that  is,  with  divine  glory  (Matt.  xxiv.  30, 
xxvi.  G4).  The  angels  are  to  be  his  attendants  and  theii' 
herald  trumpets  are  to  announce  his  advent  (Matt.  xvi. 
27,  xxiv.  31). 


THE   DAY   OF   THE   LOKD  519 

His  coming  is  to  bring  tlie  present  order  of  things  to  a 
close,  to  bring  about  the  consnnimatiou  of  his  kingdom.  It 
will  not  be  a  merely  temporary  coming,  followed  by  a 
return,  as  in  the  case  of  the  first  advent,  but  a  true 
"  paronsia,"  a  coming  to  stay ;  for  thenceforth  the  Christ 
will  be  always  with  his  people,  and  the  New  Jerusalem 
shall  come  down  from  God  out  of  heaven.  But  it  will 
not  be  to  found  an  outward  political  kingdom  as  the  Pre- 
millennarians  teach.  The  reign  of  Christ  will  be  a  spirit- 
ual reign,  in  the  hearts  of  his  people.  There  will  no 
longer  be  that  discrepancy  between  the  ideal  and  real 
kingdoms,  which  now  prevails,  but  the  dominion  of  Christ 
will  be  realized  in  all  its  fulness  in  the  midst  of  a  re- 
deemed and  holy  race. 

1.  The  last  day  is  not  an  ordinary  day,  but  one  of 
those  "  days  of  the  Lord,"  which  follow  another  standard 
of  time  from  that  to  which  we  ai'e  accustomed,  one  day 
being  as  a  thousand  years  and  a  thousand  years  as  one  day 
(2  Pet.  iii.  8).  It  is  an  epoch  rather  than  a  definite  time, 
like  the  days  of  creation,  and  the  day  of  Sabbath  rest 
which  has  followed  the  completion  of  God's  works.  Ac- 
cordingly, in  considering  the  events  of  the  last  daj',  we 
should  do  well  not  to  bind  ourselves  too  closely  to  the  ideas 
of  time  which  the  word  day  in  its  ordinary  use  suggests. 

2.  The  second  of  the  events  connected  with  the  great 
epoch  of  consummation  is  the  resurrection  of  the  dead. 
There  are  hints  of  this  truth  in  the  Old  Testament  (indi- 
rectly in  Ezek.  xxxvii.  12-14;  IIos.  vi.  2,  xiii.  14;  and 
directly  in  Isaiah  xxvi.  19  ;  Dan.  xii.  2).  It  is  referred  to 
in  the  Apocrypha  (2  Mac.  vii.  9,  11,  14,  23,  29,  36),  and 
it  was  commonly  accepted  by  the  Jews  at  the  time  of 
Christ,  it  being  the  tenet  by  which  the  sect  of  the  Phari- 
sees was  distinguished  from  the  Sadducees,  the  material- 
ists of  the  time  who  denied  the  future  life  (Josephus, 
"  Ant.,"  XVIII.  i.  3, 4;  "Eel.  Jud.,"  ii.  viii.  14).  Our  Saviour 
did  not  therefore  announce  the  doctrine  as  a  new  one,  but 


520  PEESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

rather  confirmed  it  and  gave  it  a  new  meaning  through  its 
relation  to  himself.  lie  declared  that  he,  as  the  Messiah, 
had  the  authority  and  the  power  to  call  the  dead  from 
their  graves  at  the  last  day.  In  proof  of  this  power  he 
performed  the  most  wonderful  of  all  the  miracles,  the  res- 
toration of  the  dead  to  life,  in  the  case  of  the  ruler's  daugh- 
ter, the  son  of  the  widow  of  Nain,  and  Lazarus  (Matt.  ix. 
18,  19,  23-25  ;  Luke  vii.  12-15  ;  John  xi.  11-44).  In  the 
last  instance  he  declared,  "  I  am  the  resurrection  and  the 
life  "  (John  xi.  25),  representing  himself  as  the  power  and 
the  source  of  the  resurrection.  The  great  proof  of  his 
power  to  raise  the  dead  was  given  in  his  own  i-esurrection. 

The  apostles  follow  close  in  the  track  of  the  Saviour's 
teachings.  Paul  especially,  as  was  natural  from  his  Phar- 
isaical oi'igin  and  training,  gave  a  large  place  to  the  doc- 
trine in  his  preaching  and  epistles.  In  the  fifteenth  chap- 
ter of  First  Corinthians  he  gave  the  subject  a  formal 
exposition,  bringing  it  into  direct  connection  with  the  res- 
urrection of  Christ  as  the  great  proof  and  pledge  of  the 
resurrection  of  believers.  Both  Christ  and  the  aj^ostles 
teach  that  the  i-esurrection  is  a  future  simultaneous  event, 
to  take  place  on  the  last  day.  Tliej'  never  represent  it,  as 
some  modern  interpreters  would  fain  make  them  do,  as 
the  rising  of  the  soul  at  death  into  a  spiritual  body.  Let 
us  look  more  carefully  at  the  great  doctrine. 

The  resurrection  is  man's  deliverance  from  the  power  of 
death,  his  physical  redemption.  We  have  seen  that  man 
was  made  to  be  a  unity  of  soul  and  body ;  both  are  essen- 
tial to  the  complete  man.  Sin  has  severed  this  connection 
through  death.  Death  is  not  natural  to  man,  but  the  con- 
sequence and  punishment  of  sin.  Even  believers,  although 
death  is  turned  into  life  through  the  power  of  Christ's  re- 
demption, and  they  pass  when  they  die  into  the  heavenly 
blessedness,  are  under  the  sway  of  death  in  this  respect, 
that  they  are  separated  from  the  body.  Even  if  they 
should  have  some  temporary  oi'ganism  in  the  intermediate 


THE  DAY    OF   THE   LOKD  521 

state,  it  is  not  the  earthly  body.  But  in  the  resurrection 
death  is  destroyed,  tlie  great  physical  enemy  of  man  is 
overcome;  death  is  swallowed  up  in  victory  (1  Cor.  xv. 
26,  54).  From  this  time  forward  man  is  himself  once 
more  in  all  the  fulness  of  his  essential  being. 

The  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  not  only  i-ecognizes  the 
fact  that  the  body  is  essential  to  complete  manhood,  but  it 
also  maintains  the  preciousness  and  dignity  of  the  body. 
The  view  is  widely  prevalent  that  the  body  is  a  clog  to 
man's  spirit,  and  that  it  will  be  a  blessing  to  be  freed  from 
it.  This  was  the  doctrine  of  the  Platonic  philosophy,  and 
is  connected  with  the  notion  that  matter  is  essentially  evil. 
Christianity  takes  a  different  view  altogether.  Matter  is 
good  because  God  made  it.  The  body  is  sacred.  It  par- 
takes of  the  divine  image.  Christ  sanctified  the  body 
when  he  became  flesh  and  took  to  himself  "  a  true  body  " 
as  well  as  "  a  reasonable  soul."  Under  the  influence  of  re- 
demption the  body  becomes  a  "  temple  of  the  Holy 
Ghost "  (1  Cor.  vi.  19).  It  is  indeed,  in  the  present  state, 
marred  by  sin  and  made  subject  to  death.  It  is  a  "body 
of  humiliation"  (Phil.  iii.  21),  a  "corruptible  body"(l 
Cor.  XV.  42),  a  "  mortal  body  "  (Rom.  viii.  11).  It  must 
die  and  decay,  returning  to  the  earth  as  it  was.  But  there 
is  still  in  it  the  germ  of  a  higher  life.  It  will  yet  attain 
its  ideal.  During  the  present  life  the  presence  of  Christ's 
Spirit  in  the  believer  is  the  "  earnest "  of  this  coming 
physical  redemption  (2  Coi".  v.  5).  We  lay  away  our  dead 
in  the  grave,  and  our  heaits  are  full  of  pain  that  the  pre- 
cious body  should  be  treated  thus.  It  is  a  pain  which  all  the 
thoughts  of  the  blessedness  of  the  soul  in  heaven  cannot 
remove.  This  is  the  face  we  loved  to  look  upon.  These 
closed  eyes  a  little  while  ago  looked  the  full  light  of  love 
into  ours.  These  lips  spoke  the  words  that  made  our 
hearts  thrill,  and  met  ours  in  warm  kisses.  These  hands 
clasped  ours  and  labored  for  us  with  devoted  affection. 
These  feet  went  to  and  fro  on  our  errands.      What  bodily 


522  PRESENT  DAY   THEOLOGY 

aptitudes  and  dexterities  go  down  here  into  the  silent 
dust !  What  training  of  years  went  to  make  this  body  the 
delicate  instrument  it  was!  IIow  these  jfingers  used  to  fly 
over  the  keys  of  the  piano !  Is  this  all  ?  Is  the  body 
thrown  away  like  a  cast-off  garment?  Must  it  be  forever 
hidden  from  our  sight  ?  Christ  answers,  No,  a  thousand 
tinies,  Ko !  This  dust  is  precious.  Kothing  of  what  we 
prized  will  be  lost.  Every  power,  every  capability,  every 
possibility,  will  be  preserved.  The  body,  in  spite  of  the 
appearance  which  shakes  our  faith,  is  not  dead  but  sleeps, 
sleeps  in  Jesus.  The  grave  is  its  quiet  bed,  where  it 
awaits  the  last  trump.  It  is  "united  to  Christ,"  and  he  is 
able  to  keep  that  which  is  committed  to  his  charge  until 
the  last  day.  The  loved  one  who  has  gone  from  us  is  not 
only  a  far-off  soul  in  heaven  but  will  be  reunited  with  the 
body  which  was  so  dear  to  us,  and  which  we  have  laid 
away  "  in  the  sure  and  certain  hope  of  the  resurrection  to 
eternal  life  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ." 

In  order  to  hold  this  most  precious  and  comforting  doc- 
trine, it  is  not  needful  that  we  should  enter  into  those  un- 
profitable speculations  which  have  so  often  been  indulged 
in  concerning  the  identity  of  the  present  body  and  that  of 
the  resurrection.  "Undoubtedly  there  will  be  an  identity, 
for  otherwise  we  could  not  call  it  in  any  true  sense  a 
resurrection.  But  this  identity  may  be  consistent  with 
great  differences.  It  is  not  the  material  particles  which 
constitute  the  oneness  of  the  body  during  the  diffei'ent  pe- 
riods of  the  earthly  existence,  but  the  inward  life  and  the 
outward  form.  Paul  answers  with  great  particularity  and 
clearness  the  questions  which  arise  upon  this  subject  (1 
Cor.  XV.  35-58).  lie  rebukes  the  doubt  which  asks, 
"  How  are  the  dead  raised  ?  and  with  what  manner  of 
body  do  they  come?  "  He  employs  the  same  analogy,  in 
explanation  of  the  relation  of  the  two  bodies,  which  our 
Saviour  used  M'ith  reference  tO  his  death  (John  xii.  24), 
namely,  that  of  the  seed  and   the  wheat  which  springs 


THE   DAY   OF   THE   LOED  523 

from  it.  The  two  are  related  to  each  other  as  one  kind 
of  animal  body  to  another,  or  as  the  heavenly  luminaries. 
Whereas  the  present  body  is  corruptible,  dishonorable, 
and  weak,  the  resm-rection  body  will  be  incorruptible, 
honorable,  and  strong.  The  present  body  is  a  natural  or 
psychical  body  adapted  to  a  state  of  existence  in  which  the 
lower  or  psychical  principle  of  our  nature  prevails,  a  life 
of  eating  and  drinking  and  sleeping  and  mai'rying  and 
money-getting,  and  the  like.  The  resurrection  body  will 
be  a  spiritual  body,  that  is,  not  composed  of  some  tenuous 
spiritual  substance,  as  some  would  interpret  (for  it  is  to  be 
a  body,  not  a  spirit,  material,  not  immaterial),  but  a  body 
adapted  to  a  state  in  which  the  spirit,  the  higher,  religious 
principle  in  man  will  have  the  predominance,  a  life  of 
perfect  communion  with  God  and  Christ  and  holy  beings, 
in  which  eating  and  drinking  will  be  subordinate,  in 
which  there  will  be  neither  marrjdng  nor  giving  in  mar- 
riage, but  likeness  to  the  angels  (Matt.  xxii.  30).  Paul 
further  explains  the  difference  between  the  two  bodies  by 
showing  their  relation  to  Adam  and  Christ,  the  one  the 
natural,  the  other  the  spiritual,  head  of  mankind.  "  The 
first  man  is  of  the  earth,  earthy ;  the  second  man  is  of 
heaven.  .  .  .  And  as  we  have  borne  the  image  of  the 
earthy,  we  shall  also  bear  the  image  of  the  heavenly." 
Elsewhere  the  apostle  tells  us  that  Christ  "  shall  fashion 
anew  the  body  of  our  humiliation,  that  it  may  be  con- 
formed to  the  body  of  his  glory,  according  to  the  working 
whereby  he  is  able  even  to  subject  all  things  unto  him- 
self"  (Phil  iii.  21). 

By  the  resurrection,  the  completion  of  redemption,  man 
will  be  brought  into  his  right  relations  on  the  physical 
side  to  God  and  the  universe.  The  body  was  made  that 
it  might  be,  as  we  have  seen,  the  temple  of  the  divine 
indwelling  and  the  organ  of  communication  between  man 
and  God.  The  resurrection  body  will  bring  the  redeemed 
into  a  fellowship  and  union  with  God,  which  in  this  life 


524  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

wlieii  the  body  is  corrupted  by  sin,  and  in  the  intermedi- 
ate state  with  its  absohitely  or  relatively  disembodied  con- 
dition, are  impossible.  Tlie  vision  of  God  will  then  have 
a  new  meaning,  and  the  personal  relation  to  Christ  the 
Godman  will  also  have  a  new  closeness  and  intimacy.  I 
do  not  dare  to  speculate  upon  a  point  of  which  we  know 
so  little,  but  I  do  not  doubt  that  we  have  here  a  truth  of 
profound  significance. 

Moreover,  after  the  resurrection  man  will  once  more 
stand  in  his  true  relation  to  his  fellow-man  and  to  other 
intelligent  beings.  In  the  present  state  we  meet  one 
another,  as  those  who  look  from  behind  barred  doors  and 
closed  windows.  We  are  all  more  or  less  strangers  to  each 
other.  Our  bodies  confine  and  separate  us.  Our  looks 
give  the  lie  to  our  thoughts.  We  are  not  what  we  seem. 
The  intercourse  of  even  the  best  Christians  is  artificial  and 
imperfect.  But  the  resurrection  body  will  be  the  perfect 
organ  of  the  soul  in  the  blessed  fellowship  of  a  holy  so- 
ciet}'.  By  the  resurrection  body  we  shall  likewise  be 
brought  into  the  right  relation  with  nature.  Man  was 
created  foi-  dominion  over  the  world.  But  sin  has  intro- 
duced discord  and  disorder.  The  creation  itself  has, 
through  man's  wrong- doing,  been  subjected  to  vanity, 
even  to  tlie  "bondage  of  corruption."  It  groans  and 
travails  together  in  pain.  Man  is  only  in  part  its  master ; 
he  is  by  turns  its  tyrant  and  its  slave.  But  the  creation  is 
to  be  delivered  from  its  bondage  and  to  participate  in  the 
"  liberty  of  the  glory  of  the  children  of  God."  The  re- 
demption of  our  body  is  to  be  the  redemption  of  nature 
(Rom.  viii.  19-23).  Through  man  nature  is  to  be  brought 
back  into  its  right  relation  to  God  and  His  kingdom  ;  man 
will  be  her  high-priest,  to  voice  her  praises  to  her  Maker. 
Tlirough  the  new  organism  men  will  be  able  to  exercise 
the  God-given  control  over  nature,  of  which  an  anticipa- 
tion and  pledge  was  given  in  the  miracles,  those  "  powers 
of  the  age  to  come." 


THE  DAY   OF   THE   LOKD  625 

I  have  spoken  only  of  the  resniTection  of  believei's.  But 
the  Bible  does  not  confine  the  great  physical  event  to  this 
class  alone.  Even  in  the  Old  Testament  it  is  predicted, 
with  reference  to  both  good  and  bad  :  "  Many  of  them 
that  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth  shall  awake,  some  to 
everlasting  life,  and  some  to  shame  and  everlasting  con- 
tempt "  (Dan.  xii.  2).  The  Saviour  said  that  all  that  were 
in  the  tombs  should  hear  his  voice  and  come  forth,  "  they 
that  have  done  good,  unto  the  resurrection  of  life,  and 
they  that  have  done  ill  unto  the  resurrection  of  judgment" 
(John  V.  29).  Paul,  giving  solemn  utterance  to  his  faith 
before  the  Roman  governor  Felix,  declared  that  there 
shall  be  "a  resurrection  both  of  the  just  and  the  unjust  " 
(Acts  xxiv.  15).  In  view  of  these  plain  utterances  we  can- 
not assert  that  only  believers  are  to  share  in  the  resurrec- 
tion. On  the  contrary,  this  effect  of  Christ's  redemptive 
work  is  nniversal.  "  As  in  Adam  all  die,  so  also  in  Christ 
shall  all  be  made  alive  "  (1  Cor.  xv.  22).  That  there  are 
difficulties  in  this  fact  I  cannot  deny.  I  do  not  under- 
stand why  the  unbelieving  should  receive  a  gift  that  can 
only  bring  to  them  "  shame  and  everlasting  contempt." 
But  I  am  not  disposed  to  make  my  feelings  the  standard 
of  what  God  should  do  or  not  do  in  a  matter  of  this  sort. 
Let  ns  receive  the  utterances  of  Christ  and  the  inspired 
writers  as  they  stand,  and  leave  God  to  make  it  plain 
when  we  come  to  the  realm  of  unclouded  knowledge. 

This  is  only  a  part  of  that  larger  and  very  dark  problem 
of  retribution  which  we  can  not  now  discuss.  But  whatever 
the  resurrection  may  mean  for  the  ungodly,  for  the  chil- 
dren of  God,  wlio  will  by  it  attain  the  full  estate  of  son- 
ship  (Rom.  viii.  19-23),  it  will  be  a  glorious  deliverance 
from  death  and  introduction  into  the  highest  blessedness 
of  the  life  eternal.  It  should  ever  be  the  object  of  earnest 
longing  and  eager  hope.  Like  Paul,  we  should  pj-ay  that 
we  may  know  Christ  and  the  power  of  his  resurrection, 
and  the  fellowship  of  his  sufferings,  becoming  conformed 


526  PRESENT   DAY   THEOLOGY 

unto  his  death ;  if  by  any  means  we  may  attain  unto  the 
resurrection  from  the  dead  (Phil.  iii.  10,  11). 

3.  The  third  of  the  great  events  which  are  to  signalize 
the  last  day  is  the  final  judgment.  The  judgments  of  the 
Old  Testament  are  temporal  and  not  eternal.  It  is  only  in 
prophecy  that  we  discover  intimations  of  the  judgment  of 
the  last  day,  which  has  to  do  with  the  issues  of  eternity, 
and  this  in  connection  with  great  temporal  dispensations 
of  God's  providence  which  are  types  of  the  great  crisis 
which  lies  in  the  far  future.  But  in  the  New  Testament 
the  doctrine  of  the  judgment  is  fully  and  definitely  taught. 
Our  Saviour  frequently  refers  to  it.  Commonly  he  speaks 
of  the  judgment  of  the  last  day  (Matt.  xi.  22,  24:,  xii.  36), 
of  which  he  gives  a  detailed  and  dramatic  description  in 
his  great  eschatological  discourse  (Matt.  xxv.  31-46).  But 
in  the  discourses  recorded  in  the  Gospel  of  John  he  tells 
of  a  judgment  which  has  already  begun  (John  iii.  18,  19, 
xii.  31,  xvi.  11).  In  one  important  utterance  he  represents 
the  judgment  as  both  present  and  future  (Jolm  v.  22-29). 
The  apostles  reiterate  the  Saviour's  teachings,  dwelling 
especially  upon  the  judgment  of  the  last  day,  and  teaching 
that  Christ  is  to  be  the  Judge.  We  will  consider  the  more 
important  elements  of  the  New  Testament  teaching  upon 
this  solemn  theme. 

While  the  Scriptures  lay  the  chief  emphasis  upon  the 
judgment  of  the  last  day,  yet  they  seem  to  afford  reason 
for  the  distinction  made  by  the  older  Protestant  theolo- 
gians between  the  particular  and  the  general  or  last  judg- 
ment. The  particular  judgment  concerns  the  individual 
soul.  It  begins  in  the  present  life  and  reaches  its  defini- 
tive conclusion  at  death,  when  the  period  of  probation  is 
ended  and  the  soul  is  assigned  to  its  final  destiny.  The 
general  judgment  occurs  on  the  last  day.  It  is  for  men 
and  angels.  It  will  not  decide  destiny,  but  declare  it  and 
assign  men  to  their  final  states.  Of  course,  those  who 
teach  the  continuation  of  judgment  during  the  intermedi- 


THE   DAY   OF   THE   LORD  527 

ate  state  will  not  accept  this  distinction.  Yet  all  the  drift 
of  Kew  Testament  teaching  is  in  the  direction  of  it.  The 
trnth  is,  every  man  judges  himself  when  he  decides  for  or 
against  Christ,  and  the  Saviour  only  re-affirms  this  self- 
made  judgment.  Death,  as  the  end  of  probation,  gives  it 
the  character  of  finality,  and  the  last  day  makes  it  known 
to  the  universe. 

Christ  is  the  Judge.  It  belongs  to  his  mediatorial  work 
and  his  prerogative  as  King  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  Men 
are  to  be  judged  by  man  ;  all  judgment  has  been  given  to 
him  because  he  is  the  Son  of  Man  (John  v.  27).  This 
office  is  an  essential  element  of  the  Saviour's  glorification. 

"  The  liead  tlaat  once  was  crowned  with  tliorns 
Is  crowned  with  glory  now." 

It  follows  that  all  judgment  is  Christian  judgment. 
Paul  does,  it  is  true,  give  an  exposition  of  judgment  upon 
a  basis  of  nature,  showing  that  God  will  judge  every  man 
according  to  his  works  (Rom.  ii.  1-16),  but  this  is  for  the 
purpose  of  proving  that  God  has  placed  all  men  upon  a 
new  basis  of  grace  on  the  ground  of  Christ's  atonement, 
and  that  the  benefits  of  the  Saviour's  redemptive  work  are 
freely  offered  to  all  who  will  accept  them.  He  makes  the 
results  of  Christ's  work  co-extensive  with  the  evils  of  the 
Fall  (Rom.  v.  12-21).  We  have  therefore  reason  to  be- 
lieve that  no  man  will  be  judged  upon  a  basis  of  pure 
nature,  but  that  all  will  receive  the  benefit  of  Christ's 
work.  This  is  the  ground  of  our  hope  in  the  salvation  of 
those  heathen  who  have  not  rejected  the  light  God  has 
given  them.  They  will  be  judged  according  to  Christ, 
and  their  potential  and  imperfect  faith  will  for  his  sake 
be  counted  to  them  for  righteousness.  And  as  this  prin- 
ciple of  Christian  judgment  will  inure  to  the  benefit  of  all 
who  have  not  known  of  Christ  in  this  world,  so  it  will 
enhance  the  condemnation  of  those  who,  having  known  of 
Christ,  have  rejected  him. 


528  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

The  criterion  of  judgment  is  often  represented  in  the 
New  Testament  as  tlie  deeds  of  the  earthly  life  (2  Coi-. 
V.  10  ;  cf.  Matt.  xvi.  27  ;  Gal.  vi.  7-8  ;  Kev.  xx.  12, 13).  At 
first  sii-ht  this  seems  to  contradict  the  other  teachings  of 
the  New  Testament,  according  to  which  men  are  saved  by 
the  pure  unmerited  grace  of  God  on  the  ground  of 
Christ's  redemptive  work  and  not  by  the  merit  of  their 
own  works.  But  a  closer  examination  of  the  passages 
shows  that  works  are  not  made  the  ground  of  salvation, 
but  only  the  evidence  of  the  man's  moral  character  and 
state  ;  they  include  his  faith  or  unbelief  and  his  whole  at- 
titude toward  God  and  Christ.  This  is  beautifully  brought 
out  in  the  Saviour's  vivid  poi'traitnre  of  the  scenes  of  the 
last  day  (Matt,  xxv,  31-46).  Those  who  for  Christ's  sake 
have  fed  and  clothed  and  visited  and  helped  his  brethren 
are  adjudged  to  have  done  all  this  to  Christ  himself. 
Those  who  failed  to  do  it  are  regaided  as  liaving  rejected 
Christ.  The  question  is  not  of  merit,  but  of  character 
and  act  and  relation  to  Christ.  The  ground  of  acceptance 
is,  of  course,  not  the  works  as  meritorious  good  works,  but 
the  grace  of  Christ  to  which  these  works  are  due,  and  of 
the  presence  of  which  thej^  are  the  evidence. 

The  last  judgment  is,  as  we  have  seen,  general  rather 
than  particular.  It  is  not  needful  that  we  should  regard  it 
as  a  great  pageant,  ordered  after  the  model  of  lunnan  tri- 
bunals and  their  processes.  We  should  also  bear  in  mind 
what  has  been  said  about  the  application  of  our  common 
measures  of  time  to  the  last  day.  The  peculiarity  of  the 
general  judgment  is  that  it  is  open  and  public,  so  that  its 
processes  and  its  results  are  known  to  all  souls  in  God's 
universe.  It  is  intended  not  so  much  for  the  decision  of 
destiny  as  for  the  manifestation  of  it.  Its  great  object  is 
to  vindicate  the  righteousness  of  the  divine  government 
as  a  government  of  grace  through  Jesus  Christ.  It  will  be 
the  great  Theodicee.  Then  will  the  dark  things  in  God's 
government  be  made  light.     Then  will  the  secret  things 


THE   DAY    OF   THE   LOKD  529 

be  revealed.  It  will  be  shown  beyond  a  perad venture 
that  in  all  things  the  Judge  of  all  the  earth  has  done 
rioiit.  From  the  nature  of  the  case  this  could  not  be 
shown  during  the  course  of  human  history.  The  imputa- 
tion of  unrighteousness  has  often  rested  upon  God.  Even 
His  own  children  have  often  cherished  a  secret  mistrust 
that  there  might  be  some  partiality  or  inequality  in  His 
ways.  But  now,  in  the  final  outcome  of  things,  it  vv^ill  be 
shown  that  the  scales  of  justice  hang  even.  Even  that 
darkest  and  most  inscrutable  of  all  God's  dealings,  the 
final  punishment  of  the  ungodl}^  will  be  shown  to  be  right. 
Even  the  wicked  themselves  will  acknowledge  it  to  be 
right,  and  go  of  their  own  accord,  like  Judas,  to  their  own 
place.     The  devils  will  believe  and  tremble. 

The  revelations  of  individual  human  acts  and  charac- 
ter, which  undoubtedly  will  be  made  in  the  last  judgment, 
will  not  be  arbitrary,  but  only  such  as  will  be  needful  to 
vindicate  the  righteousness  of  God's  government.  Hence 
it  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  every  trivial  act  will  be 
exposed.  The  last  judgment  has  often  been  presented  in 
such  a  way  as  to  render  the  thought  of  it  shocking  to 
every  sensitive  niind,  as  if  then  the  universe  was  to  be  re- 
solved into  a  great  society  for  gossip  and  all  unhallowed 
curiosity  to  be  gratified.  But  God  will  not  in  the  judg- 
ment forsake  the  infinite  delicacy  which  belongs  to  Him 
as  the  Highest  and  the  Holiest.  We  may  be  sure  that 
where  it  is  needful  to  raise  the  veil  which  covers  the  scars 
on  His  children's  lives,  He  will  do  it  with  such  tender 
love,  that  they  will  rejoice  that  they  are  able  to  give 
their  testimony  to  His  holy  dealings ;  and  where  it  is 
needful  to  expose  the  festering  sin  of  the  lost,  it  will  be 
certainly  done  with  infinite  compassion.  God  will  not 
taunt  and  expose  to  ridicule  those  whom  He  condemns. 

With  the  last  judgment  the  eternal  age  begins.  It  is 
the  final  scene  in  the  long  world  age,  the  conclusion  of 
human  history  in  its  earthly  stage.  It  will  be  the  con- 
34 


530  PRESENT  DAY  THEOLOGY 

suminatioii  of  tliu  Saviour's  glory.  The  kingdom  of  God 
will  then  1)0  complete.  All  beings  will  be  brought  under 
the  sway  of  God.  The  good  will  be  triumphant  the  uni- 
verse over.  What  evil  remains  will  be  brought  into  sub- 
mission, absolute  and  final.  In  the  name  of  Jesus  every 
knee  shall  bow,  of  things  in  heaven  and  things  in  earth 
and  things  under  the  earth,  and  every  tongue  confess  that 
Jesus  Christ  is  Lord,  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father 
(Phil.  ii.  10,  11). 


THE  PRESENT  DIRECTION  OF  THEOLOGICAL 
THOUGHT  IN  THE  CONGREGATIONAL  CHURCHES 
OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

[A  paper  read  before  the  International  Congregational  Council,  in 
London,  July  15,  1891.] 


THE  PRESENT  DIRECTION  OF  THEOLOGICAL  THOUGHT 
IN  THE  CONGREGATIONAL  CHURCHES  OF  THE 
UNITED   STATES 

To  understand  the  present  tendencies  of  theology 
among  our  American  Congregationalists,  we  must  loolc 
backward.  Onr  history  has  been  marked  by  one  great 
theological  epoch,  which  began  with  Jonathan  Edwards, 
and  lasted,  with  inconsiderable  intermissions,  nntil  past 
the  middle  of  our  own  century.  It  was  a  period  of  intense 
theological  activitj'  and  earnestness.  The  New  England 
theology,  born  as  it  was  in  the  "  Great  Awakening,"  and 
nourished  by  a  remarkable  series  of  revivals,  was  practi- 
cal in  its  aims,  and  full  of  fire,  of  energy,  of  aggressive 
power. 

The  time,  however,  came  when  the  religious  life  ebbed 
and  the  power  of  the  New  England  theology  declined. 
From  the  first  it  had  its  defects.  The  philosophical  ele- 
ment in  it  had  overshadowed  the  Scriptural  and  spiritual 
elements.  It  had  been  too  exclusively  concerned  with 
the  questions  of  scholastic  Calvinism.  The  controver- 
sies to  which  it  gave  rise  had  turned  the  thoughts  of  the 
theologians  away  from  the  essential  and  central  facts  of 
Christianity.  The  preaching  had  grown  abstract,  dry,  and 
powerless,  and  the  people  had  become  tired  of  it.  In  the 
reaction  all  theology  fell  into  disrepute. 

Other  causes  tended  in  the  same  direction.  New  prob- 
lems of  church  work  came  to  the  front.  The  press  outbid 
tlie  pulpit  in  popularity.  The  great  anti-Christian  move- 
ment, which  has  been  manifest  tliroughout  the  whole 
domain   of   modern    life   and    tliouo-ht,    made   itself  felt 


534  THE  PRESENT  DTRECTIOTiT 

among  lis.  The  philosophy  and  criticism  of  Germany, 
the  new  religions  problems  opened  np  by  the  theory  of 
evolntion,  the  agnostic  philosophy,  turned  onr  thoughts 
from  the  niceties  of  the  Calvinistic  system  to  the  defence 
of  the  foundations  of  religion  itself. 

Just  when  the  change  came  it  would  be  hard  to  say. 
But  the  new  state  of  things  became  distinctly  apparent 
after  our  civil  war.  Since  then  we  have  been  passing 
through  an  untheological  stage  in  our  history.  Doctrine 
has  been  undervalued.  Our  preaching  has  been  practical 
rather  than  theoretical,  ethical  I'ather  than  theological. 
In  the  sphere  of  religious  thought  we  have  been  con- 
cerned with  the  great  theistic  and  apologetical  questions 
which  underlie  Christianit}'  rather  than  with  the  problems 
of  Christian  theolog3%  It  has  seemed  like  fiddling  while 
Rome  was  burning  to  discuss  the  moot  points  of  the 
Christian  system  while  the  agnostic  was  triumphantly  de- 
claring that  the  arguments  for  the  existence  of  a  personal 
God  have  been  overthrown,  and  the  pantheist  was  claim- 
ing to  liave  proved  beyond  a  peradventure  that  revelation 
and  miracle  have  no  reality,  except  in  the  sense  that  makes 
all  thought  a  revelation,  and  every  common  flower  that 
blooms  a  miracle.  But  now,  for  some  time  past,  it  has 
been  becoming  increasingly  evident  that  the  time  of  our 
theological  eclipse  is  drawing  toward  its  close.  The  reac- 
tion against  theology  seems  about  to  have  lost  its  force. 
We  have  begun  to  see  that  our  new  conditions  require 
not  the  abolition  of  theology,  but  its  reconstruction.  Our 
]ieople,  who  grew  so  weaiy  of  a  lifeless  preaching  of  doc- 
trine, are  crying  out  for  a  true  and  living  preaching  of 
doctrine. 

Moreover,  the  great  philosophical  and  apologetical  ques- 
tions have  been,  to  a  considerable  extent,  settled.  We  no 
longer  fear  that  the  foundations  will  ci-umble  beneath  our 
feet.  We  have  seen  the  scientific  theory  of  evolution 
turned  from  an  enemy  to  a  friend  of  i-eligion.     We  have 


OF   TTTEOLOOTCAL   TITOUGIIT  535 

inatclied  tlie  agnostic  and  pantlieistic  philosopliies  by  a 
theistic  pliilosophy  whicli  is  far  better.  We  are  readjust- 
ing our  Christian  evidences,  not  abandoning  Paley  and 
Butler,  but  supplementing  them,  giving  especial  promi- 
nence to  the  great  central  evidence  from  the  believer's 
personal  experience  of  Christ's  redemption. 

So  we  are  once  more  taking  possession  of  our  theolog- 
ical inheritance.  There  is  a  revival  of  interest  in  the 
themes  of  Christian  divinity.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
that  a  new  theological  movement  has  begun.  Already  we 
have  advanced  far  enough  to  be  able  to  judge  something 
of  its  nature. 

This  much  of  explanation  has  been  needful  to  prepare 
the  way  for  the  proper  subject  of  this  paper — the  present 
direction  of  theological  thought  among  our  American 
churches.  To  this  I  now  apply  myself.  If  much  of 
what  I  say  relates  also  to  the  larger  movement  in  religious 
thought  going  on  all  over  the  Protestant  world,  it  will  not 
be  strange.  Still,  our  movement  has  its  own  distinctive 
features,  and  the  subject  will  be  presented  from  our  point 
of  view.  If  also  my  own  personal  equation  must  be 
taken  into  account,  yet  I  trust  my  purpose  to  be  an 
honest  chronicler  will  be  recognized. 

The  determining  factors  in  onr  present  thought  are  not 
new.  They  are  the  principles  that  belong  to  ns  as  Protes- 
tant Christians  and  as  American  Congregationalists. 

The  substance  of  our  theology  is  to  be  found  now,  as  al- 
ways, in  the  great  unchanging  facts  and  truths  of  Christi- 
anity accepted  in  every  age  of  the  church.  They  are  clear- 
ly set  forth  in  our  Congregational  Creed  of  1883,  which, 
although  somewhat  criticised  by  our  conservative  men  as 
not  sufficiently  precise  on  two  or  three  points  of  doctrine, 
has  never  been  complained  of  by  the  other  side,  and  so 
may  certainly  be  regarded  as  expressing  our  minimum  of 
belief. 

"We  are  also  true  to  what  is  best  in  our  American  Con- 


536  THE   PRESENT   DIRECTION 

gregatioiial  traditions.  We  do  not  repudiate  the  New 
England  theology,  onr  glory  in  the  past,  but  are  trying  to 
adapt  it  to  the  changed  conditions  in  which  we  find  our- 
selves. There  are,  of  course,  individuals  who  would  ruth- 
lessly break  our  continuity^  with  the  past.  But  the  great 
body  of  us  have  no  desire  to  adopt  alien  forms  of  thought. 
We  have  onr  strong  centripetal  tendencies,  which  balance 
our  centrifugal  forces.  We  do  not  wish  to  forget  that  we 
are  the  theological  descendants  of  Robinson,  Cotton,  the 
Mathers,  Edwards,  Hopkins,  Snialley,  Dwight,  Emmons, 
Griffin,  Taylor,  or,  to  comedown  to  later  times,  of  Edwards 
A.  Park  and  Henry  B.  Smith.  So,  if  we  speak  of  a 
"  new  theology,"  we  mean  that  it  is  new  only  as  a  living 
body  is  new  at  each  fresh  stage  in  its  growth,  conserving 
and  fulfilling  the  one  type  that  runs  through  all  its 
changes,  and  that  is  neither  old  nor  new. 

Thus  united  to  the  Christian  and  our  own  denomina- 
tional past,  we  are  moving  forward,  as  God  gives  us 
strength  and  wisdom,  trying  to  work  out  a  theology 
adapted  to  the  needs  of  the  stirring,  restless  age  in  which 
we  live.  Let  us  look  now  more  closely  at  some  of  our 
present  tendencies. 

We  mark,  first,  a  movement  toward  a  more  spiritual 
conception  of  Christianity.  It  is  a  part  of  our  birthright 
as  Congregationalists  to  emphasize  the  reality  and  present 
power  of  the  things  unseen  and  eternal — the  reigning 
Christ,  the  constant  redemptive  activity  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  the  invisible  yet  all  powerful  kingdom  of  God. 
But  in  our  theology  these  facts  have  not  been  as  clearly 
recognized  as  they  should  have  been.  We  have  been  too 
prone  to  regard  Christianity  as  a  system  of  abstract 
truths  and  of  remote  historical  facts.  Notions  and  propo- 
sitions have  been  more  to  us  than  the  great  spiritual 
I'ealities  for  which  the}'  stand,  the  sacred  events  of  nine- 
teen hundred  years  ago  more  than  the  redemptive  facts 
of  to-day. 


OF   THEOLOGICAL   TITOUCITIT  537 

But  we  are  beginning  to  give  the  spiritual  element  in 
Christianity  its  due  place.  We  do  not  ignore  the  divine 
truths  and  sacred  history  which  constitute  the  revelation 
once  for  all  given  to  mankind.  To  do  this  would  be  to 
cut  the  foundations  away  from  under  Christianity.  But 
we  see,  as  never  before,  that  Christianity  is  far  more  than 
a  revelation  ;  that  it  is  a  great  system  of  redemptive 
agencies,  at  work  here  and  now,  by  which  God  is  building 
up  his  kingdom  in  the  world. 

We  are  coming  to  understand  that  it  is  this  recognition 
of  the  invincible  reality  of  spiritual  Christianity  which  is 
going  to  give  our  theology  its  great  power  in  the  future. 
This  is  the  ground  of  our  own  deepest  convictions  of  the 
truth  of  the  Christian  system.  Criticism  may  assail  the 
historical  facts  of  revelation  ;  rationalism  may  urge  objec- 
tions to  its  doctrines  ;  but  the  surf  on  our  coast  of  Maine 
might  as  easily  overthrow  the  granite  cliffs  against  which 
it  breaks  as  criticism  and  rationalism  disturb  the  Christian 
realities  which  stand  firm  in  the  experience  of  the  indi- 
vidual believer  and  the  church.  And  so  in  dealing  with 
those  outside.  Our  age  is  intensely  realistic.  It  demands 
facts.  It  bases  its  philosophy,  its  science,  its  practice, 
upon  experience.  If  we  can  show  it  that  there  are  spirit- 
ual facts  just  as  real  as  the  facts  of  the  natural  world,  and 
spiritual  experience  as  certain  as  physical  experience,  we 
gain  enormous  power  over  it.  Our  theologians  in  their 
teaching,  and  our  ministers  in  their  preaching,  are  more 
and  more  recognizing  this  secret  of  our  power. 

Another  sign  of  the  times,  indicative  of  the  direction 
of  theological  thought  in  our  churches,  is  the  renewed 
study  of  the  Bible.  One  of  the  most  encouraging  features 
of  the  theological  interregnum  through  which  we  have 
passed  has  been  the  fact  that  our  ministers  and  Christian 
people  have  been  going  back  to  the  sacred  volume  in  a 
spirit  of  earnest  and  prayerful  seeking  after  divine  truth. 
Never  in  our  history  has  there  been  more  thorough,  Intel- 


538  THE   PRESENT  DIRECTION 

Hgent,  and  devout  investigation  of  the  Scripture.  Here 
also  we  are  faitlifnl  to  our  principles  as  Congregationalists. 
We  bate  no  jot  of  loyalty  to  the  Bible.  It  is  to  us,  no 
less  than  to  our  fathers,  the  inspired  record  of  revelation, 
the  all-sufficient  rule  of  faith  and  practice,  the  great  means 
of  grace  by  which  we  are  brought  into  contact  with  the 
spiritual  realities  of  God's  kingdom,  and  by  which  the 
church  of  Christ  is  maintained  and  edified.  We  draw  our 
theology  from  it.  We  look  to  it  to  correct  the  onesided- 
ness  and  eiTor  of  our  imperfect  Christian  experience.  The 
theological  thought  of  our  times  aims  to  return  to  the 
Bible,  and  to  draw  fresh  draughts  from  its  fountain  of 
life  and  truth. 

We  do  not,  however,  regard  the  Bible  precisely  as  our 
ancestors  did.  We  distinguish  the  revelation  from  its  rec- 
ord. We  recognize  the  diversity  of  the  books  that  com- 
pose it,  and  the  progress  of  the  revelation  they  describe. 
We  discriminate  between  its  different  types  of  doctrine. 
The  old  piecemeal  method  of  dealing  with  it,  which  re- 
garded each  verse  as  complete  in  itself,  without  reference 
to  the  context  or  the  book  in  which  it  is  found,  has  fallen 
into  well-merited  desuetude. 

We  are  trying  to  deal  fairly  and  fully  with  the  facts 
brought  to  light  by  modern  biblical  criticism.  I  think 
there  are  few  among  us  disposed  to  ignore  these  facts,  as 
there  are  few  who  would  construe  them  in  the  interests  of 
unbelief.  To  the  great  body  of  our  thinking  men  it  is  not 
a  question  whether  the  Bible  is  inspired — that  all  believe 
— but  how  the  doctrine  of  inspiration  shall  be  stated  so  as 
to  express  the  whole  truth.  And  we  are  coming  more 
clearly  to  understand  the  great  purpose  of  the  Bible — 
namely,  to  bring  the  church  and  tlie  individual  in  all  ages 
into  vital  contact  with  the  historic  facts,  the  divine  truth, 
and  the  spiritual  power  of  Christianity ;  and  so  to  discern 
what  is  essential  and  what  non-essential  for  the  attainment 
of  that  purpose.     We  are  most  of  us  ready  to  admit  that 


OF  THEOLOGTCAL   THOUGHT  539 

false  standards  have  been  set  up,  that  an  infallibility  in 
non-essentials  has  been  demanded  which  the  Bible  never 
claims,  and  which,  if  it  existed,  would  render  it  less  fitted 
for  its  end.  We  are  beginning  to  see  that  we  may  grant 
that  the  sacred  writers  were  not  scientific  historians,  not 
philosophers  or  men  of  science,  not  experts  in  the  methods 
of  scientific  exegesis  or  of  literary  criticism,  and  yet  may 
rest  firm  in  our  conviction  that  they  were  so  directed  by 
the  supernatural  influence  of  God's  Spirit  as  to  give  us  the 
perfect  rule  of  faith  and  life. 

A  more  serious  problem  confronts  us  in  the  facts  and 
theories  of  the  Higher  Criticism.  But  here  also  we  are 
trying  to  deal  honestly  with  the  facts.  There  is  no  one 
of  our  evangelical  denominations  in  America  more  ear- 
nestly  seeking  for  light  on  this  important  range  of  subjects 
than  our  own.  We  do  not  want  to  settle  the  questions 
thus  presented  by  prejudice,  or  clamor,  or  ecclesiastical 
authority,  but  by  patient,  scholarly,  reverent  investiga- 
tion. That  the  Old  Testament,  to  which  our  Divine  Lord 
appealed  in  all  his  teachings,  will  ever  be  shown  to  be 
anything  but  a  supernatural  and  inspired  book,  we  do  not 
believe.  But  we  are  sure  we  are  acting  in  his  spirit  when 
we  give  a  candid  hearing  to  those  who  claim  that  our  old 
theories  of  the  modes  and  times  of  its  composition  were 
mistaken.  Some  of  our  ablest  scholars  have  accepted,  to 
a  greater  or  less  extent,  the  new  views.  But  our  min- 
isters and  intelligent  laymen,  who  form  the  juiy  that 
nmst  ultimately  decide  the  case,  are  more  cautious,  hesi- 
tating to  give  their  verdict  in  a  matter  of  such  great 
importance  till  they  are  sure  that  all  tlie  facts  are  before 
them. 

And  while  we  wait  for  the  result  we  rest  more  strongly 
than  ever  upon  the  proof  of  the  divinity  and  truth  of  the 
Bible  furnished  by  the  experience  of  its  redemptive  power, 
the  old  testimoniion  Spi?'itus  Sancti  internwni,  which  is 
ours  by  virtue  of  our  Protestant  descent. 


540  THE   PRESENT   DIRECTION 

Again,  we  are  coming  more  distinctly  to  recognize  the 
central  place  of  the  living  Christ  in  our  theological 
thought.  It  goes  without  saying  that  he  is  supreme  in 
the  Christian  life.  Our  early  Congregationalism  went 
beyond  all  other  systems  in  asserting  his  supremacy  in 
the  rule  of  his  people  and  the  world.  But  in  our  preach- 
ing and  our  theology  other  elements  of  Christianity  have 
too  often  usurped  his  place,  or  a  doctrine  about  him  has 
been  substituted  for  the  Christ  himself,  or  his  propheti- 
cal and  priestly  offices  have  overshadowed  his  kingly. 

We  are,  however,  becoming  more  sensible  of  the  fact 
that  as  the  power  of  Christianity  is  concentrated  in  the 
living  Christ,  our  King,  our  Redeemer ;  so  he  is  to  be  the 
great  theme  of  our  preaching,  the  central  and  organizing 
fact  of  our  theology.  We  teach  no  new  doctrine  respect- 
ing him.  Our  great  Unitarian  controversy  settled  once 
for  all  the  question  of  our  orthodoxy.  The  modern  pan- 
theism, which  preserves  the  Christian  phraseology,  but 
really  deprives  it  of  meaning,  has  little  if  any  currency 
among  us.  The  Christian  positiveness  which  reduces 
Christ's  divinitj'  to  his  moral  solidarity  with  God,  has  not 
met  with  favor.  We  have  received  helpful  impulses  from 
modern  German  speculations  respecting  the  Incarnation, 
the  kenosis,  and  the  need  of  Christ's  perfecting  work 
apart  from  the  fact  of  sin.  But  we  are  less  disposed  than 
of  old  to  speculate  upon  these  high  subjects,  more  willing 
to  admit  the  mystery.  It  is  the  Christ  himself,  in  all 
his  living,  saving  power,  upon  whom  our  thought  is  con- 
centrated, whom  we  strive  to  hold  up  to  men,  and  in 
whom  we  find  the  key  to  all  the  problems  of  religious 
thought. 

The  way  is  thus  being  opened  for  a  larger  and  richer 
conception  of  God.  The  old  theology,  in  dealing  with 
this  subject,  looked  too  much  to  philosophy,  too  little  to 
Christianit}'.  But  we  are  trying  to  "  Christologize  "  our 
doctrine  of  God,  to  set  Ilim  forth  as  He  is  seen  in  the  face 


OF   THEOLOGICAL   THOUGHT  541 

of  Jesus  Christ.  It  is  often  said  among  lis  that  we  are 
coming  to  a  more  ethical  conception  of  God.  This  is  true. 
But  it  is  more  ethical  because  it  is  more  Christian,  because 
it  is  not  of  the  God  of  Nature,  but  of  the  God  and  Father 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  It  is  also  said  that  we  have 
corrected  the  old  view  of  God  which  emphasized  His  tran- 
scendence at  the  expense  of  His  immanence,  by  giving  due 
place  to  the  latter  element.  This  is  likewise  true.  But 
we  have  not  learned  the  lesson  from  pantheism,  as  some 
would  claim,  but  from  our  fuller  and  truer  conception  of 
Christianity.  It  is  the  unchristologized  view  of  God  that 
unduly  emphasizes  His  transcendence.  It  is  the  view  of 
God  through  Christ  the  Mediator  which  gives  the  other 
element  in  its  proper  relation  to  the  whole  truth.  It  is  in 
Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit  that  God  comes  near  to  us  and 
dwells  in  us,  and  it  is  through  this  wonderful  fact  that  we 
learn  the  reality  of  God's  indwelling  in  man  and  Nature 
apart  from  redemption.  And  thus  also  the  way  is  opened 
for  a  far  deeper  and  truer  understanding  of  the  great 
Christian  truth  of  the  Trinity. 

As  we  are  learning  to  Christologize  the  doctrine  of  God, 
so  we  are  learning  to  do  the  same  by  the  doctrines  of  the 
eternal  plan,  of  creation,  and  of  providence — especially 
the  doctrine  of  the  plan.  Once,  like  Milton's  fallen  angels, 
our  New  England  theologians 

"reasoned  higli 
Of  providence,  foreknowledge,  will  and  fate, 
Fixed  fate,  free  will,  foreknowledge  absolute, 
And  found  no  end  in  wandering  mazes  lost." 

Tired  out  by  the  vain  eifort  we  have  come  to  Christ, 
and  seek  in  him  the  solution  of  the  mystery  of  decrees  and 
election,  sovereignty  and  free  will.  If  it  be  Calvinistic  to 
place  God  above  man,  to  believe  that  the  destiny  of  the 
universe  is  in  Ills  hands,  to  liold  that  sin  exists  by  His 
permissive  decree  and  not  in  His  despite,  to  maintain  that 


542  THE   PRESENT   DIRECTION 

in  the  initiation  and  progress  of  the  Christian  life  all  is  of 
grace,  then,  I  suppose,  the  greater  number  of  us  are  Cal- 
vinists.  But  our  controversies  on  the  philosophical  aspects 
of  these  subjects  are  over,  and  differing  opinions  respect- 
ing them  do  not  separate  brethren  or  furnish  tests  of  fel- 
lowship. 

In  similar  language  we  may  speak  of  our  doctrine  of 
sin.  We  are  trying  to  view  it  in  the  light  of  its  rela- 
tion to  Christ  and  his  redemption.  We  are  thus 
kept  from  yielding  to  the  temptation  so  strongly  pressed 
upon  us  by  the  prevalent  popular  philosophies,  to  make 
light  of  sin.  The  Puritan  conscience  is  not  dulled  but 
quickened  by  our  present  theological  tendencies.  But  the 
scholastic  questions  respecting  sin,  once  uppermost  in  our 
discussions,  have  lost  their  old  importance.  Immediate 
and  mediate  imputation,  original  sin,  the  moral  status  of 
new-born  infants,  are  not  the  subjects  which  occupy  our 
thought,  but  the  awful  fact  of  sin  itself.  To  bring  to 
bear  Christ's  redemption  to  overcome  it — this  is  what 
seems  to  us  most  important ;  and  the  theology  that  will 
do  this  best  seems  to  us  the  best  theology,  even  though  it 
may  not  solve  every  theoretical  problem  respecting  the 
nature  of  sin. 

We  maintain  no  less  strongly  than  of  old  the  absolute 
necessity  of  this  redemption  as  supernatural  and  divine. 
We  are  learning  that  it  can  be  made  effectual  not  only  to 
save  the  individual,  but  to  renovate  society.  Our  minis- 
ters are  giving  themselves  eagerly  to  the  study  of  sociol- 
ogy, that  they  may  apply  the  Christian  solution  to  its 
problems.  In  our  doctrine  of  redemption,  while  we  are 
exalting  the  kingly  office  of  Christ,  it  is  not  at  the  ex- 
pense of  his  other  offices.  We  hold  as  firmly  as  ever  to 
his  atoning  work.  The  change  with  respect  to  it  is  not 
in  the  way  of  a  weakening  grasp  upon  the  fact,  but  of  an 
increasing  willingness  to  admit  the  imperfections  of  the 
theories  by  which  we  sti'ive  to  account  for  the  fact.     It  is 


OF   THEOLOGICAL   TPIOUGHT  543 

a  coiiimon  saying  among  us  that  the  atonement  is  too  large 
to  be  held  in  the  mould  of  any  single  theory.  Yet  I 
think  that  most  of  us  give  it  a  Godward,  as  well  as  a 
manward,  efficacy.  One  of  the  brightest  jewels  in  our 
Congregational  crown  is  the  memory  of  Horace  Bushnell  ; 
but  our  best  thought  would  not  admit,  unless  I  am  much 
mistaken,  that  this  brilliant  and  spiritual  theologian  said 
the  last  word  on  this  high  theme.  What  is  called  the 
Catholic  doctrine  of  the  Atonement,  namely,  that  Christ's 
death  was  in  some  true  sense  the  objective  ground  of  the 
forgiveness  of  sin,  still  commends  itself  to  the  larger  num- 
ber of  our  Christian  people. 

The  whole  drift  of  modern  thought,  and  the  pressure 
of  the  movement  I  have  tried  to  describe,  have  been  con- 
centrated upon  the  problems  of  eschatology.  The  conflict 
of  soul  upon  these  subjects  through  which  we  have 
passed  has  been  no  less  intense,  because  we  have  known 
that  it  was  not  peculiar  to  us.  The  old  Calvinism,  which 
our  fathers  loyally  accepted,  left  a  part  of  mankind 
wholly  out  of  reach  of  Christ's  redemptive  grace.  When 
the  New  England  theology  broke  the  iron  ring  of  this 
consistent  and  logical  system  by  the  adoption  of  the  doc- 
trine of  a  universal  atonement,  it  was  inevitable  that  new 
questions  should  arise. 

During  the  last  decade  we  have  been  discussing,  as  the 
world  pretty  well  knows,  the  relation  of  the  heathen  to 
God's  grace  in  Christ.  The  old  view,  which  prevailed 
during  the  last  century,  and  had  many  advocates  until 
quite  recent  times,  doomed  the  heathen  as  a  mass  to  perdi- 
tion. This  severe  doctrine  has  been  generally  abandoned. 
Our  discussions  have  not  been  upon  this  point,  but  upon 
the  question  as  to  the  manner  and  grounds  of  the  salva- 
tion of  those  heathen  who  are  saved.  The  common  view 
has  been  that  their  imperfect  faith,  based  upon  their  nat- 
ural knowledge  of  God  and  such  elements  of  truth  as  are 
to  be  found  in  their  corrupt  religions,  is  reckoned  to  them 


544  THE   PRESENT   DIRECTION 

for  righteousness  for  the  sake  of  Christ,  who  gave  himself 
a  ransom  for  all,  and  that  so  their  eternal  destiny  is 
settled  on  the  basis  of  the  decisions  of  this  life.  The  able 
and  devoted  teachers  in  our  beloved  mother  theological 
seminary  at  Andover  have  urged  the  other  view,  common 
in  Germany,  that  an  opportunity  is  granted  the  heathen  in 
the  other  life,  between  death  and  the  judgment,  to  hear 
the  Gospel  and  accept  or  reject  Christ.  I  do  not  propose 
to  enter  into  the  merits  of  our  controversy.  So  far  as  it 
has  involved  unchristian  bitterness,  we  are  ashamed  of  it. 
We  are  hard  fighters  on  our  side  of  the  water,  and  both 
parties  have  dealt  heavy  blows.  The  result  of  the  discus- 
sion has  been  to  emphasize  the  silence  of  the  Scriptures 
on  the  subject.  The  majority  still  hold  the  older  view, 
because  it  seems  to  us  more  in  accord  with  the  general 
drift  of  the  Scripture  and  the  principles  of  our  New  Eng- 
land theology.  But  there  is  an  increasing  willingness  to 
admit  that  our  speculations  cannot  exhaust  the  possibili- 
ties of  God's  redemptive  grace,  and  that  a  point  of  this 
sort  can  never  permanently  be  made  a  test  of  orthodoxy. 
The  much  more  difficult  question  of  futui-e  punishment 
has  not  been  the  subject  of  important  controversy  among 
us.  But  it  has  profoundly  affected  us.  Our  deeper  con- 
ception of  Christianity,  our  enlarged  view  of  the  infinite 
love  and  mercy  of  God,  our  stronger  realization  of  the 
power  of  Christ's  redemption,  have  united  to  give  this 
subject  a  peculiar  painfulness  and  solemnity.  It  has 
pressed  not  only  upon  our  theologians,  but  upon  all  our 
thoughtful  men  and  women.  It  is  a  subject  of  peculiar 
difficulty  to  many  of  our  most  promising  students  of  divin- 
ity. Some  among  us  find  relief  in  the  theories  of  the 
"  larger  hope "  and  "  conditional  immortalitj^"  If  the 
greater  number  continue  to  hold  in  substance  the  imme- 
morial doctrine  of  the  Christian  church,  it  is  because  we 
cannot  convince  ourselves  that  the  words  of  Christ  and 
his   Apostles,  fairly  interpreted,  sanction  any  other  view. 


OF  THEOLOGICAL   THOUGHT  545 

It  is  with  ns  a  matter  of  loyalty  to  our  Master,  whose 
word  is  our  final  authority.  Our  difficulties  and  perplexi- 
ties we  cast  on  him,  and  leave  him  to  show  us  at  the 
Last  Day  how  this  awful  fact  is  consonant  with  love  and 
justice. 

Such  is  the  present  direction  of  theological  thought 
among  us,  so  far  as  I  am  able  to  understand  it,  and,  in  the 
brief  time  allotted  me,  to  describe  it.  The  outlook  is  one 
of  hopefulness.  Our  faces  are  toward  the  light.  As  we 
are  striving  for  more  of  the  power  of  Christ  in  our  life,  so 
we  are  striving  for  more  of  the  truth  of  Christ  in  our 
Christian  thought.  And  we  believe  that  we  shall  attain 
it  steadily  as  the  years  advance,  "  till  we  all  come  in  the 
unity  of  the  faith,  and  of  the  knowledge  of  the  Son  of 
God,  imto  a  perfect  man,  unto  the  measure  of  the  stature 
of  the  fulness  of  Christ." 

35 


L    IJ^DEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


[The  indices  were  prepared  by  the  author's  colleague   and  valued  friend, 
Professor  Francis  B.  Denio. — Ed.] 


Abelard,  on  atonement,  387. 

Abraham,  election  and  faith  of,  425. 

Absolute,  a  necessary  idea  of  the 
mind,  12. 

Actual  sin,  311. 

Adam,  headship  of  the  race,  186,  332  ; 
sin  of,  325  seq.,  and  universal  sin, 
330  seq.,  341. 

Advents  of  Christ,  in  prophecy,  508 
seq. 

Agassiz,  299. 

Agnostic  philosophy,  inconsistency 
of,  12  seq.  ;  overmatched,  534. 

Anabaptist  doctrine  of  Second  Com- 
ing. 513- 

Angels  inferior  to  men,  176  seq.  ; 
their  place  in  the  kingdom,  118. 

Angel  of  Jehovah,  131. 

Animals,  under  necessity,  without 
self-consciousness,  290. 

Anselm,  Cur  Deus  Homo,  153  ;  sat- 
isfaction, theory  of,  383  seq. 

Antichrist,  516. 

Apocalypse,  83  ;  its  value,  489  seq. 

Apochrypha,  84. 

Apollinarians,  149. 

Apostles,  inspiration  of,  95  seq. 

Arians,  148  ;  arianism,  194  seq. 

Arminian  objection  to  God's  inclu- 
sion of  man's  free  acts  in  His  plan, 
236  seq.  ;  view  of  original  sin,  332  ; 
theory  of  atonement,  385  ;  doctrine 
of  election,  431  seq. 

Ascension  of  Christ,  necessity  and 
meaning  of,  144. 

Assembly's  Catechism.  See  West- 
minster's. 


Assurance,  Christian,  a  privilege, 
475- 

Athenagoras,  the  character  of  the 
early  Christians,  52  seq. 

Atonement,  a  provision  for  the  for- 
giveness of  sin  or  reconciliation, 
319,  367 ;  rooted  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, 367  seq.  ;  typified  in  the  high- 
priest  and  his  holiness,  367  ;  in  the 
Old  Testament  sacrificial  system, 
368  ;  in  the  teaching  of  the  suffer- 
ing Messiah,  370  ;  and  the  examples 
of  intercession,  371 ;  the  great 
theme  of  the  New  Testament,  371 
seq. ;  in  the  first  three  gospels,  371 
seq.;  John's  gospel,  374;  Paul's 
writings,  374 ;  originated  in  God's 
love,  376  ;  a  reconciliation,  376  ;  its 
final  cause  holiness,  377 ;  epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  ;  Christ  the  perfect 
sacrifice,  378  ;  Peter's  Epp. ,  378;  in 
John's,  379  ;  all  teach  the  doctrine  of 
vicarious  atonement,  379.  Essential 
in  the  redemptive  work,  403  ;  secures 
an  attitude  of  reconciliation  on  God's 
part,  414  ;  universality  of,  411  seq.  ; 
nature  of,  its  results,  its  relation  to 
punishment,  319;  the  doctrine  cen- 
tral and  unique  in  Christianity,  381  ; 
history  of  the  doctrine,  382  seq.  ;  its 
importance  always  recognized,  382; 
various  theories,  their  excellences 
and  defects,  383  seq. ;  value  of  the 
theories,  389  ;  it  originated  in  the 
love  of  God,  389  ;  is  by  God  to  God, 
also  by  man  for  man,  390  ;  ground 
of  the  efficacy  of  Christ's  death  as  a 
substitute,  391  seq.  ;  the  doctrinal 
statement,  394 ;  reasonableness  of 
the  doctrine,  394  seq.  ;  reasons  for 
objections  to  the  doctrine,  395 ;  ob- 
jections and  replies,  396  seq. 


548 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


AuGUSTiN,  St.,  189;  subordination- 
ism  of,  198  ;  abridged  the  love  of 
God,  224;  man  "a  great  deep," 
282  ;  made  for  God,  285  ;  on  the  ori- 
gin of  sin,  330;  on  the  will,  331; 
doctrine  of  election,  430  ;  theory  of 
millennium,  515. 

Authenticity  of  the  Bible,  80  scq. 

Authority  of  the  Bible,  84,  87  scq.  ; 
supreme  as  the  record  of  God's  re- 
demptive revelation,  87  ;  and  giving 
the  mind  of  Christ,  88 ;  in  what 
sense  infallible,  104  scq. 

Baptism  into  the  name  of  the  Trinity, 
meaning  of,  193. 

Baronius,  Cardinal,  251. 

Bacon,  105  j^^.,  153. 

Baker,  405. 

Beecher,  Dr.  Lyman,  the  value  of 
moral  freedom,  245. 

Believer,  union  of,  with  Christ,  per- 
sonal, the  basis  and  source  of  the 
work  of  grace,  465. 

Bellamy,  242. 

Bible,  see  Holy  Scriptures. 

Biblical  criticism,  results  of,  84  Jcy-  -" 
justified,  108;  attitude  of  Congrega- 
tionalists  toward,  538. 

Body,  a  unit  with  the  soul  in  the  ideal 
man,  2q6,  327,  520;  the  union  disor- 
ganized by  sin,  327,  520;  dignified 
by  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection, 
521  ;  sacred,  521  seq.  ;  resurrection 
body,  523  ;  life  in,  524. 

Bruce,  27. 

Buddhism,  conception  of  evil  in,  242. 

Burns,  Robert,  341  scq. 

Bushnell,  Dr.,  543;  Christian  faith, 
38,  454;  divinity  of  Christ,  142-; 
prayer,  276 ;  theory  of  the  atone- 
ment, 388. 

Butler,  Bishop,  definition  of  proba- 
tion, 345  ;  satisfaction  of  Christ, 
391  ;  argument  for  immortality,  479. 

Byron,  testimony  to  universal  sin, 
323- 

Calling,  the  Christian,  472  seq. 

Calvin,  on  God's  method  of  educa- 
tion, 32  ;  the  Trinity,  198  ;  abridged 
the  love  of  God,  224 ;  Psa.  v.  22  : 
322  ;  the  sufferings  of  Christ,  385  ; 
election,  430. 

Calvinism,  strong  and  weak  points, 


source  of  its  power,  229,  430  seq.  ; 
tempted  ii  over-emphasis  of  divine 
immanence,  269;  defects  of  its  doc- 
trine of  predestination,  and  its  impli- 
cations, 431  ;  early  doctrine  respect- 
ing non-elect  infants,  416. 
Campbell,  McLeod,  theory  of  atone- 
ment, 388. 

Canon,  biblical,  development  of,  81 
seq.  ;  present  tests  of,  84. 

Causation,  ex  nihilo  nihil  Jit  heXongs 
to  the  realm  of  second  causes,  256. 

Cause,  First,  necessity  of,  9  seq. 

Chalcedon,  council  and  creed,  150. 

Chaldean  Genesis,  249. 

Chalmers,  Dr.,  "  Expulsive  power 
of  new  affection,"  316. 

Chance,  no,  275. 

Change  of  heart,  457  seq. 

Character,  in  the  region  of  ultimate 
choices,  313  ;  in  the  highest  sense, 
314  ;  wrong,  how  formed,  327  ;  Chris- 
tian, a  means  to  service,  472. 

Charisms  of  the  New  Testament, 
partly  natural,  partly  supernatural, 
96  scq.  ' 

Cheerfulness,  Christian,  ground  of, 
227. 

Children,  relation  to  God,  224  scq.  ; 
moral  character  of,  343,  353  ;  salva- 
tion of  and  its  ground,  355  seq.  ;  not 
threatened  with  eternal  punishment, 
356. 

Choice,  nature  of,  309 ;  kinds  of 
choices,  312  ;  relation  of,  to  charac- 
ter, 313  scq.,  and  habit,  314;  su- 
preme wrong  choice  total  depravity, 

,  351  ;  free,  an  ultimate  fact,  339,  472, 
and  the  essential  element  in  sin,  339  ; 
yet  not  an  absolute  power,  340. 

Christian,  the  true,  a  Bible  Chris- 
tian, 86  ;  the  knowledge  of,  38  ;  sins, 
471  ;  the  thoughtful,  a  test  of,  228. 

Christian  Church.     See  Church. 

Christian  Conception  of  God,  209 
scq. 

Christian  Evidences,  the  new,  534 
seq.     See  Evidences. 

Christian  experience  verifies  the 
authority  of  the  Bible,  84  ;  is  cor- 
rected by  it,  85  ;  is  actual,  37  ;  based 
on  the  presence  of  God  in  the  Trin- 
ity, 38  seq.  ;  individual  experience, 
40  ;  that  of  the  Church,  41  ;  like 
much  of  the  knowledge  of  mankind, 
41. 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


549 


Christian  life,  progressive  djnng  un- 
to sin  and  living  unto  righteousness, 
467.     See  New  Life. 

Christian  nurture,  its  relation  to 
change  of  heart,  464. 

Christianity,  character  of,  42.  See 
Evidences.  Character  of,  42 ;  a 
practical  remedy  for  sin,  TiJ  ;  truth 
of,  tested  by  practical  trial  only,  38  ; 
effects  of,  on  individual  lives,  52  ;  its 
growth,  53  ;  transforming  power  in 
the  world,  54  ;  present  power,  55  ; 
Christian  and  heathen  countries 
compared,  55  ;  present  influence  of 
Christian  nations,  56;  Christian  civ- 
ilization redeeming  nature,  and 
teaching  a  new  conception  of  duty 
to  the  body,  72  ;  relation  of,  to  Juda- 
ism, 47,  to  heathenism,  48;  to  Pla- 
tonic philosophy,  and  the  religions 
of  the  ancient  world,  49  ;  its  future, 
537- 

Christocentric  theology,  188. 

Christoi.OGICAL  problems,  their  dif- 
ficulty, 152.  See  Incarnation,  and 
Kenosis.  The  present  nature  of  the 
Christ,  167;  present  on  earth  by  the 
Spirit,  168. 

Christologizing,  the  doctrine  of 
God,  and  other  Christian  doctrines, 
especially  that  of  His  plan,  540  seq. 

Church,  its  place  in  the  kingdom, 
122 ;  experience  of,  40  ;  owes  its 
continued  existence  to  the  Bible, 
86  ;  the  invisible  ruled  by  Christ, 
406  ;  ordinances  of,  means  of  grace, 
411  ;  a  missionary  church.  516  seq.  ; 
the  early,  its  views  on  eschatology, 
and  their  importance,  502  seq. 

Cicero,    denies    special   providence, 

274. 
Coleridge,  the  atonement,  392. 

Coming  of  Christ.  See  Second  Com- 
ing. 

Conditional  immortality,  the  theory 
subversive  of  revelation  and  implies 
a  denial  of  the  divine  existence,  295 
seq. 

Congregationalists,  attitude  of,  to- 
ward Biblical  criticism,  538  ;  toward 
Christ,  544,  and  the  great  Christian 
doctrines,  539,  544;  creed  of  t883, 
535  ;  their  emphasis  on  spiritual  con- 
ceptions of  Christianity,  536  ;  theo- 
logians of  the  past,  533,  536  ;  theo- 
logical thought  of,  at  the  present 
time,  533  seq. 


Conscience,  how  best  explained,  6  ; 
witnesses  to  the  divine  law  and  au- 
thority of  God,  289. 

CONSTANTINE,   I48,  51I. 

Controversies  of  the  church,  about 
philosophy  of  theology,  rather  than 
content  of  doctrine,  199. 

Conversion,  effects  of,  39;  a  free 
choice  of  the  sinner,  461  ;  relation  of, 
to  regeneration,  justification,  and 
faith,  462  seq. 

Converted  sinner,  condition  of,  467. 

Corrupt  nature,  how  formed,  327. 

CosMOLOGiCAL  argument  for  God's 
existence,  9;  attributes,  self-caused, 
omnipotent,  13. 

Cosmogonies,  scriptural,  heathen, 
and  scientific,  character  and  value 
of,  248-256. 

Council  of  Nice,  148;  ofChalcedon, 
150. 

Covenant  theory,  332. 

Creation,  character  of  the  narratives 
in  Genesis,  287  ;  the  result  of  in- 
spiration and  revelation,  250  ;  com- 
parison with  hfathen  and  scienlific 
cosmogonies,  248  seq.  ;  .  scientific 
cosmogony,  science  deals  with  sec- 
ond causes,  the  Bible  a  religious 
book,  251  ;  cosmogony  in  Genesis 
corresponds  to  the  character  of  the 
Bible,  252  ;  the  two  must  differ,  253  ; 
yet  show  wonderful  harmonies,  254  ; 
relation  to  evolution,  255.  The  nat- 
ure of  creation,  no  eternal  substance 
outside  of  God,  256  ;  creation  caused 
by  the  free  determination  of  an  infi- 
nite will  as  first  cause,  257  ;  invisible 
like  a  miracle,  257  ;  analogous  to  the 
act  of  a  man's  free  will,  258  ;  or  imag- 
ination, 259.  Christian  doctrine  of, 
the  work  of  each  person  of  the  Trin- 
ity, 260 ;  originated  in  the  love  of 
God,  for  His  self-manifestation,  261  ; 
for  His  glory,  262,  and  the  redemp- 
tion of  man,  263. 

Crbationism,  probably  some  form 
preferable,  299. 

Creeds,  Nicene,  149;  ofChalcedon, 
150. 

Criticism.     See  Biblical,  higher. 

Cur  Deus  Homo,  384. 

Dana,  on  origin  of  man,  297. 
Darwin,  on  the  ancestor  of  man,  298. 
David,  received  divine  Spirit,  94. 


550 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


Days  of  Genesis,  epochs,  254,  519. 

Day  of  the  Lord,  502  seq.  An  epoch, 
519.  Eschatological  views  of  the 
early  church,  502;  their  ini]:)ortance, 
503  ;  New  'I'esiament  teaching  of  the 
last  day,  ^oi,sei].  ;  twofold,  505  ;  prin- 
ciples of  prophecy  illustrated  from 
the  Old  Testament,  50  scq.  ;  the 
near  and  the  remote  elements  in  the 
New  Testament,  508  scq.  Prelimina- 
ries to  the  last  day  are  :  overthrow  of 
persecuting  powers,  511  ;  the  prog- 
ress of  the  kingdom,  512;  the  work 
of  Antichrist,  the  conversion  of  the 
heathen,  516  ;  and  the  Jews  are  to 
become  Ciiristians,  517.  Events  of 
the  last  day,  see  Second  Coming, 
Resurrection,  Judgment. 

Dead,  the  occupations  of,  493  scq. 

Death,  not  natural,  61,  520  ;  a  sub- 
version of  man's  true  destination,  61  ; 
the  result  of  sin,  61,  520  ;  a  check  up- 
on sin,  180  ,f('^.  ,•  caused  by  the  with- 
drawal of  God's  supporting  power, 
266;  the  consequence  and  the  pun- 
ishment of  sm,  318,  327,  520  ;  a  race 
punishment,  348,  392,  and  blessing 
and  a  motive,  349;  destroyed  in  the 
resurrection,  521  ;  the  Old  Testa- 
ment antithesis,  482  ;  the  Old  Testa- 
ment meaning,  483  ;  new  meaning 
given  by  Jesus,  486  seq.  ;  spiritual, 
487  ;  the  real,  495. 

Dkath  of  Christ,  vicarious  or  substi- 
tutionary, 372  seq. 

Decision,  life  the  time  of,  420. 

Decree  of  God,  includes  free 
choices,  434  ;  etficient  and  permis- 
sive, 239,  434. 

Decretive  will  of  God,  240. 

Deism,  has  no  God  of  providence, 
265  ;  denies  God's  government,  271, 
anl  the  universality  of  His  provi- 
dence, 274. 

Dkity  of  Jesus  Christ,  137  scq. 

DRt,iTZCH,  on  Unitariinism,  205;  on 
the  knowledge  of  the  Trinity,  207; 
on  Psalms,  in  re  immortality,  485. 

Demoniacal  possession,  opinion  of 
Charles  Kingsley,  65. 

Depravity,  total,  a  wrong  supreme 
choice,  351. 

Destruction  of  Jerusalem,  pro- 
phetic significance,  509. 

Determinism,  its  teaching,  and  er- 
ror, 308 ;  drift  of  philosophic  and 
scientific  thought  toward,  309  ;  sub- 


versive of   true    theological    ethics 

and  philosophy,  235  ;  not  to  be  ac- 
cepted, 472. 
Disobedience  to  God,  the  negative 

character  of  sin,  302. 
Displeasure  of  God,  evidence  of  the 

Divine  estimate  of  sin,  318  ;  may  be 

turned  to  favor,  319. 
Distributive  justice  of  God,  386  seq. 
Divine  efficiency,  269  scq.,  333. 
Divinity  of  Christ,  the  only  mode  of 

explaining  his  life  and  character,  168 

seq. 
Docetists,  148. 
Dorner,  reason   for  the  incarnation, 

154  ;  progressive  incarnation,  162. 
Dwight,  President,  Jo.  i.  9,  136;  xiv. 

28,  142;   Ro.  i.\.  5,  Tit.  iii.  13,  146. 

Earth,  to  be  redeemed,  503. 

Ebionism,  194. 

Ebionites,  148. 

Ebr.\rd,  179. 

Ecclesiastes,    value  of,   79 ;    place 

in  the  canon,  83. 
Education,    in  and  for  redemptive 

revelation,    28    seq.      Education    a 

process  of  the  mastery   of  the  soul 

over  the  body,  60. 

Edwards,  President,  description  of 
conversion,  39  ;  chief  end  of  God  in 
creation,  230;  optimism  of,  242; 
divine  efficiency,  269  ;  the  will,  309  ; 
original  sin,  333. 

Effectual  calling,  regeneration, 
461. 

Efficiency,  divine,  26gscq.,  333. 

Efficient  decree  of  God,  239  seq. 

Election,  defined,  individual  and 
national,  27  ;  its  roots,  28  ;  in  Old 
Testament,  213,  216  ;  Biblical  teach- 
ing of,  a  teaching  of  special  provi- 
dence, 274  ;  prominence  of  the  prin- 
ciple in  the  Old  Testament,  its  nat- 
ure, 424;  the  human  condition,  the 
efficiency  of  divine  grace,  Abraham's 
case  representative,  425  ;  the  New 
Testament  retains  the  same  ideas 
and  adds  a  deeper  meaning,  426  ; 
Christ  elected  from  eternity  to  be 
King  of  an  eternal  kingdom,  427  ; 
election  of  New  Testament  saints 
also  derived  from  the  eternal  pur- 
pose of  God,  to  the  blessings  of  re- 
demption, 427  scq.  ;  New  Testament 
doctrine  practical,    coincident   with 


IISTDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


551 


the  universality  of  the  provision  for 
salvation,  nnd  the  requirement  of 
personal  faith,  429  ;  historical  forms 
of  the  doctrine,  429  .f<y.  ,•  a  consistent 
doctrine  possible,  predestination  in- 
cluded in  the  divine  plan,  433  ;  con- 
sistent with  human  freedom,  efii- 
cient  and  permissive  decrees,  434  ; 
consistent  with  the  universality  of 
provision  of  grace,  435  ;  statement 
of  doctrine,  437 ;  its  place  in 
Christian  doctrine,  437 ;  taught  in 
Scripture,  438 ;  useful  for  edifica- 
tion, 439  ;  not  used  in  full  sense  of 
unbelievers,  435  ;  the  Christian's 
election,  472. 
El  Shaddai,  192. 

Emmons,  Dr.,  divine  efficiency,  270; 
original  sin,  333  ;  children,  344. 

End,  chief,  of  man,  468  ;  man  made 
for  redemption,  283  scq.  ;  for  the 
kingdom  of  God,  457. 

Ends,  ultimate  and  subordinate,  one 
supreme,  312. 

Energy,  dissipation  of,  proves  a  be- 
ginning, II ;  a  constant,  because 
God  behind  it,  266. 

Environment  and  sin,  337. 

Epiphany  of  Christ,  518. 

Error  in  doctrine,  arising  from  ne- 
glect of  the  Bible,  87. 

Erskine,  Thomas,  42. 

EscHATOLOGY.  See  Day  of  the  Lord, 
Other  Life.  Present  thought  upon, 
543- 

Esther,  book  of,  79. 

Eternal  death,  327. 

Ethnic  religions,  their  narratives  of 
creation,  248. 

Evidences  of  Christianity,  vary  ac- 
cording to  the  needs  of  the  person 
to  be  reached,  36  ;  experimental 
proof.  See  Christian  Experience. 
Confirmatory  proof,  nature  of  the 
Christian  system,  character  of  this 
proof,  it  might  have  been  expect- 
ed from  God,  42 ;  adapted  to  the 
needs  of  man,  43  ;  Jesus  Christ,  of 
whom  the  truth  of  Christianity  is 
the  only  adequate  explanation,  44 
seq.  ;  the  relation  of  Christianity  to 
the  history  and  religions  of  the 
world,  47  seq.  ;  the  evidence  from 
miracles,  50  seq.  ;  and  from  pro- 
phecy, 51  ;  the  effects  of  Christian- 
ity, in  individual  lives,  52  ;  in  its 
growth,     53  ;   in     its     transforming 


power  in  the  world,  54  ;  its  present 
power,  55  ;  the  new  Christian  evi- 
dences, 534  seq. 

Evil,  natural  and  moral,  347  ;  reason 
for  physical,  180. 

Evolution,  requires  a  divine  cause 
behind  it,  10  scq.  ,-  placed  by  some 
in  the  place  of  God,  30  ;  cosmogony 
of,  255  seq.  ;  and  the  Bible,  296  seq.  ; 
does  not  account  for  sin,  307;  be- 
come a  friend  to  Christianity,  534. 

Evolution  of  redemptive  revelation, 
30  ;  mingling  of  natural  and  super- 
natural elements  in,  31. 

Example  of  Christ,  belongs  to  His 
atoning  work,  366. 

Experience.  See  Christian  experi- 
ence. 

Ezekiel,  83. 


Faith,  a  receptivity,  435  ;  condition 
of  election,  result  of  gracious  edu- 
cation, 425  ;  of  Old  Testament  saints 
implicit,  415  ;  character  and  efficacy 
of  implicit  faith,  418;  pre-Christian, 
422  ;  the  human  element  in  justifica- 
tion, 448  seq.  ;  nature  of,  erroneous 
ideas  concerning,  449  ;  is  trust,  a 
personal  relation,  450  ;  illustrations 
from  childhood,  451  ;  from  life  in 
general,  in  religion  the  same  in  kind, 
differs  in  the  nature  of  the  object, 
452 ;  how  it  justifies,  453  ;  without 
merit,  454;  essential  to  sanctifica- 
tion,  455  ;  fruit  of  living  faith,  469  ; 
necessity  of,  in  considering  God's 
plan,  246. 

Faithfulness  of  God,  rooted  in  His 

holiness,  213. 
Fall   of  Man,  325  seq.  ;  account  in 

Genesis  historical,  324. 
Family,   its  place  in  the   Kingdom, 

122. 

Father,  God,  the  meaning  of  the 
name,  193  ;  the  originator  of  crea- 
tion, 260.     See  Trinity. 

Fatherhood  of  God,  nature  of,  214 
seq. ;  universal,  224  ;  the  basis  of  the 
Gospel,  217. 

Federal  theory,  332. 

Fisher,  Professor,  the  Calvinist  and 
Arminian,  433. 

Final  judgment.     See  Judgment. 

Finite  nature  of  man,  not  the  origin 
of  sin,  307. 


652 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


Forgiveness  of  sin.  See  Justifica- 
tion. 

Fossils,  types  of  the  Christ,  i8i. 

FREF.noM,  of  the  will.  See  Choice. 
An  ultimate  fact,  339  ;  true  meaning 
of,  289  ;  importance  of  the  true  doc- 
trine of,  308  seq.;  essential  in  morals 
and  religion,  235,  472  ;  not  license, 
313  scq.  ;  involves  control  of  the 
physical  world,  271  seq.  ;  necessity 
and  uses  of,  244  seq.  ;  its  reality  and 
that  of  the  divine  plan,  not  destroyed 
by  God's  foreknowledge,  235  ;  de- 
velopment of,  in  human  life,  336  ;  re- 
sults of  its  abuse,  327  ;  essential  ele- 
ment in  sin,  337,  339  ;  not  an  abso- 
lute power,  340 ;  rarely  exercised, 
312;  compatible  with  inability,  357 
seq. 

FUNUAMF.NTAL  theology,   IIO. 

Future  life.     See  Other  Life. 
Future  probation.     See  Probation. 
Future    punishment,    present    Con- 
gregational views  on,  543. 

Gambold,  227. 

Gehenna,  495. 

German  thought,  influence  of,  upon 
American  Congregational  thought, 
533- 

Gess,  Kenosis,  160. 

Gideon,  93. 

Glory  of  God,  what,  a  purpose  of 
creation,  262. 

God.  See  Creation,  Father,  Govern- 
ment, Holy  Spirit,  Holiness,  Love, 
Plan,  Providence,  Redemptive  Rev- 
elation, Redemption,  Son,  Trinity. 
His  existence  and  nature  known 
from  the  natural  revelation,  I  scq.; 
the  proof  the  same  as  that  of  the  ex- 
istence of  men,  and  of  the  world,  2  ; 
modes  of  revelation,  ii,scq.;  nature 
of  God  thus  revealed,  12  seq.  ;  this 
knowledge  of  God  open  to  all  men, 
16  ;  the  God  of  grace,  the  God  of 
nature.  His  kingdom  everywhere, 
117;  nature  of  the  Christian's  knowl- 
edge, 38  ;  self-limitations  of,  25  ; 
names  of,  their  significance,  192  ; 
His  glory  a  purpose  in  creation, 
262 ;  work  of  Father  and  Son,  in 
providence,  279 ;  unchangeable, 
232  ;  just,  386  ;  wise,  232  ;  meaning 
of  His  repentance,  232  ;  decrees  of, 
hatred  and  permission  of  sin,  239 
seq.  ;  His  estimate  of  moral  values, 
180  ;  Christian  conception  of.  He  is 


Holy  Love,  210  ;  this  taught  every- 
where by  the  Bible,  211  scq.  ;  espec- 
ially revealed  in  His  fatherhood,  215; 
character  of  redemptive  love,  217  ; 
importance  and  results  of  holding 
true  doctrine  of  God's  character, 
219  ;  no  excuse  for  ignorance,  220  ; 
holiness  not  to  be  abridged,  221  ; 
nor  His  love,  223  ;  richer  conception 
of  God  in  recent  thought,  540. 
GoDET,  160. 

Good  works,  meritorious,  relation  to 
salvation,  469. 

Gospel,  the  marvels  of,  173  scq. 

Gospels  of  the  foremost  importance, 
78. 

Government,  God's,  His  providence 
in  the  strictest  sense,  270  ;  of  the  in- 
animate world,  not  to  be  disputed 
unless  His  freedom  is  denied,  271  ; 
of  spiritual  beings,  273. 

Governmental  theory  of  the  atone 
ment,  386. 

Grace,  God's  work  of,  manifested  in 
redemption,  24  ;  the  ground  of,  328  ; 
the  relation  into  which  mankind  are 
brought  by  Christ's  work,  414  ;  a 
counterbalance  for  evil  environ- 
ment, 437  ;  immediately  followed  the 
first  sin,  327  ;  work  of,  445  ;  power 
of,  448  ;  source  of  justification  and 
righteousness,  444 ;  the  efficient 
cause  of  election,  425  ;  gifts  of,  435  ; 
means  of,  411  ;  witnessed  by  the 
Holy  Spirit,  may  be  exhausted, 
410 ;  unresisted,  not  irresistible, 
462. 

Gregory  of  Nyssa,  383. 

Grotius,  387. 

Guilt  means  responsible  authorship 
of  sin,  also  exposure  to  the  just  dis- 
pleasure of  God,  always  a  personal 
matter,  degrees  of,  316  scq.  ;  correl- 
ative and  commensurate  with  pun- 
ishment, 317. 

Habit,  how  formed,  314. 

Hades,  491  seq. 

Headship  of  the  race,  Christ's,  184  ; 
Adam's,  186. 

Heart,  change  of,  457  scq.  ;  instanta- 
neous ?  464. 

Heathen,  salvation  of,  417,  420  seq. ; 
saved  by  grace,  422  ;  conversion 
the  subject  of  prophecy,  516  ;  heath- 
en and  Christian  countries  con- 
trasted, 55. 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


553 


Heathenism  has  vibrated  between 
polytiieisni  and  pantheism,  204; 
ascribed  moral  evil  to  God,  211. 

Hebrews,  83. 

Heaven,  an  ideal  of  perfection  actu- 
alized, 113.     See  New  Life. 

Heredity  and  original  sin,  337. 

Hesiod,  248. 

Higher  criticism.  See  Biblical  criti- 
cism. Attitude  of  American  Congre- 
gationalists  toward,  538. 

Hodge,  Dr.  Charles,  truth  in  the  doc- 
.  ji  t7_V-r  trine  of  the  Trinity,  205  ;  the  extent 
^/Vr/o*^  of  redemption,  417. 

Holiness  is  Christ-likeness,  306  ;  of 
God,  a  formal  aspect  of  God's  char- 
acter, 21P ;  in  what  respect  the 
idea  falls  behind  that  of  love,  217 ; 
is  the  source  of  the  faithfulness, 
truth,  and  justice  of  God,  213  ;  why 
more  fully  taught  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, 221  seq.  ;  taken  for  granted 
in  the  New  Testament,  taught  that 
it  consists  in  love,  214  ;  if  abridged, 
sin  is  minimized  and  the  redemption 
loses  its  significance,  221  seq. 

Holy  Scriptures.  See  Authenticity, 
Authority,  Biblical  and  Higher  Crit- 
icism, Interpretation,  Study.  Essen- 
tially a  religious  book,  251  ;  show 
what  man  is  in  relation  to  God,  282  ; 
nature  and  characteristics  of,  75  seq.; 
an  organism,  of  which  the  redemp- 
tive revelation  is  the  unifying  prin- 
ciple, 76  ;  or  the  Kingdom  of  God, 
77  ;  relation  of  parts,  "jj  seq.  ;  a  rec- 
ord of  the  redemptive  revelation, 
22,  79  ;  almost  the  revelation  itself, 
80  ;  their  importance  for  the  indi- 
vidual Christian  life  and  for  the 
church,  85  seq.  ;  the  arbiter  of  con- 
troversies, 86;  can  endure  criticism, 
109 ;  written  chiefly  by  men  inspired 
in  a  general  sense,  99  ;  bear  evidence 
of  preparation  under  the  special  in- 
fluence of  the  Holy  Spirit,  wiser  than 
unaided  men,  100;  inspired  as  a 
whole  and  in  the  parts,  102  ;  not  to 
be  used  to  prove  psychology,  296  ; 
yet  may  imply  a  philosophy,  295  ; 
renewed  study  of,  537;  character  of 
this  study,  53B. 

Holy  Spirit,  work  of,  in  Old  Testa- 
ment, 131  ;  inspired  Old  Testament 
workers,  93  seq.  ;  immanent  princi- 
ple in  creation,  260  ;  agent  for  the  ac- 
complishment of  God's  providence, 
280  seq.  ;  represents  the  truth  of  pan- 
theism, 206  ;  is  God,  191  ;  relations  in 


the  Trinity,  201  ;  operations  in  the 
world,  202  ;  the  agent  for  the  e.xecu- 
tion  of  Clirist's  kingly  office,  408  ; 
represents  Christ,  capacitated  the 
disciples  to  do  their  work,  evidenced 
that  Jesus  was  the  Christ,  409  ;  the 
agent  for  the  larger  providential 
work  of  Christ,  409  ;  renders  efficient 
the  preaching  of  the  Gospel,  regen- 
erating and  sanctifying  men,  410  ; 
unifying  the  church,  411.  His 
agency  in  regeneration,  459;  uses 
the  truth  of  the  Gospel,  work  not 
physical,  460;  imparts  life  of  Christ 
to  the  believer,  465  ;  His  indwelling 
a  factor  in  the  new  life,  gives  the  in- 
ner certainty  to  the  Christian,  40; 
speaks  in  Scripture,  the  supreme 
judge  for  the  determination  of  all 
controversies,  91. 

HOMOIOUSIOS,  148. 

HOMOOUSIOS,    148. 

Hopkins,  242  ;  divine  efficiency,  270  ; 
original  sin,  333. 

HOPKINSIAN  theology,  relation  to  Cal- 
vinism, 269. 

Humiliation  of  Christ's  earthly  life, 
143- 

Huxley,  on  first  origin  of  the  uni- 
verse, 10 ;  monogenistic  origin  of 
man,  299  ;  the  will,  310. 

Ignorance,  learned  and  unthinking, 
152 ;  respecting  God  inexcusable, 
220. 

Image  of  God,  defined,  retained  and 
defaced  by  fallen  man,  291 ;  as  ori- 
ginal endowment,  and  as  destina- 
tion, 292  ;  Jesus  Christ  as  image, 
171. 

Immanence  of  God,  works  in  and 
through  creation,  267  ;  the  truth  in 
pantheism  is  greatly  emphasized  in 
the  Bible,  268  ;  often  over-empha- 
sized in  Calvinism,  269  seq. 

Immortality  of  the  soul,  not  inde- 
structibility, 267  ;  denied  by  ma- 
terialists, 477;  evidence  for,  pre- 
sumptive from  man's  religious  con- 
sciousness, 478 ;  from  his  personal 
consciousness,  478  seq.  ;  from  the 
capabilities  of  the  soul  developed  in 
this  life,  480  ;  from  the  relation  be- 
tween evil  and  good  in  this  life,  and 
the  religious  purpose  of  man's  life, 
481  ;  positive  evidence  from  the  Bi- 
ble, 482  seq.  ;  Old  Testament  revel- 
ation limited,  the  reason,  484. 


554 


IKDEX  OF  SUBJECTS 


Impulse  in  a  man,  in  a  brute,  309. 

Imputation,  immediate,  mediate, 
332. 

Inability  of  sinner,  in  this  life,  357 
seq.  ;  in  the  future  life,  360. 

Incarnation,  reason  for,  153  seq.  ; 
possibility  of,  based  in  God's  rela- 
tion to  his  creatures,  156  ;  grounded 
in  God's  love,  158  ;  nature  of,  158 
seq.  ;  truly  a  revelation  of  God,  175  ; 
the  strongest  argument  for  and 
against  Christianity,  178  seq. 

Infallibility  of  the  Bible,  proper 
and  improper  sense,  104  seq. 

Infants,  salvation  of,  416;  moral 
character  of,  343  seq. 

Infirmity,  sins  of,  316. 

Inspiration,  broad  doctrine  of,  in  the 
Bible,  92  seq.  ;  generic,  supernat- 
ural, yet  based  upon  the  natural  tal- 
ents of  a  person  and  conditioned  by 
them,  97  ;  special  of  the  Scriptures, 
proper  mode  of  considering  the  sub- 
ject, the  Scriptures  an  organism,  98  ; 
chiefly  written  by  inspired  men, 
99 ;  the  record  presumptively  in- 
spired as  well  as  the  writers,  100  ; 
not  dictation,  yet  language  bears 
the  marks  of  an  inspiring  God,  loi  ; 
testimony  from  the  Bible,  loi  seq.  ; 
nature  and  limitation  of  the  insfii- 
ration  of  the  Bible,  103  seq. 

Interpretation,  Biblical,  correct 
principles  important  because  of  the 
importance  of  the  Bible,  88.  See 
Study. 

Infinite,  a  necessary  idea  of  the 
mind,  12. 

Intercession,  in  the  Old  Testament, 
371- 

Intermediate  state,  Bible  reticent 
upon,  420 ;  conscious  existence  in, 
488  ;  condition  in,  489  seq.^  493  seq.; 
its  place,  491  ;  in  heaven,  492  ;  ac- 
tivities of  the  blessed,  494;  state  of 
the  unblessed,  495  ;  a  period  of  ed- 
ucation, 498,  421  ;  not  purgatory, 
498 ;  may  consist  with  infirmities 
and  frailties,  499  seq.  ;  a  matter  of 
speculation,  501. 

iRENyEUS,    153. 

Israel,  Election  of,  28. 

Jehovah,  192. 
Jephthah,  94. 

Jerusalem,  prophetic  significance  of 
its  destruction,  509. 


Jesus  Christ.  See  Atonement,  Chris- 
tological  Problems,  Kingly  Office, 
Redemptive  Work,  Second  Coming. 
The  proper  spirit  for  the  study  of 
Christ's  person,  130;  a  proof  of 
Christianity  in  his  human  personal- 
ity, his  teaching,  plan,  and  its  fulfil- 
ment, claim  to  divinity,  and  his 
death,  44  seq.  ;  was  educated  for 
his  work,  29 ;  his  relation  to  the  Old 
Testament  and  to  the  law,  32  ;  the 
character  of  his  knowledge  of  the  Old 
Testamenl,  82  ;  inspiration  of,  95  ; 
miracles  an  essential  part  of  his  per- 
sonal revelation,  68  ;  the  central  fact 
of  the  divine  plan,  231  ;  the  arche- 
type of  the  divine  image  in  man, 
293  ;  the  redeemer  of  man  to  that 
archetype,  294  ;  man  made  for  him, 
285  ;  the  standard  by  which  to  judge 
of  siiy,  306  ;  sanctified  the  body, 
521  ;  the  God-man,  that  he  might 
make  atonement  for  man,  fitted  by 
his  human  experience,  390 ;  knew 
sin  as  nobody  else  did,  391  ;  a  sub- 
stitute in  atonement,  391,  394  ;  rela- 
tion to  our  punishment,  394  ;  nature 
of  his  work  on  earth,  403  ;  prophet, 
priest,  and  king,  363;  the  source  of 
our  knowledge  of  the  future,  476  ; 
place  in  Congregational  thouglit, 
539- 

Jesus  the  Christ,  the  living,  ruling 
Christ  the  great  fact  of  facts,  129  ; 
the  early  Christian  confession,  130  ; 
Old  Testament  teaching  of  the 
meaning  of  the  Clirist,  131  seq.  ;  the 
meaning  to  the  early  Christians,  133  ; 
the  pre-existent  Christ,  133  seq.  ; 
summary  of  the  Biblical  teaching 
concerning,  137 ;  the  Christ  on 
earth,  incarnation,  137  ;  Jesus  a  true 
man,  unique,  138  ;  especially  in 
moral  perfection,  139  ;  teachings  of 
the  Gospels  and  apostles,  139 ; 
title,  his  self-consciousness,  and 
direct  claims,  139  seq.  ;  the  period 
of  his  humiliation,  143  ;  the  ascend- 
ed Christ,  New  Testament  teach- 
ings, 144  seq.  ;  resurrection  and  as- 
cension a  coronation,  144  ;  mean- 
ing of  the  Pentecost,  manifestation 
to  Stephen  and  Paul,  called  Lord 
and  God,  145  ;  position  and  son- 
ship,    association    with    the    Father, 

146  ;  apostolic  emphasis  on  the  di- 
vinity, 147  ;  the  final  judge,  146. 
Doctrine   of  the   Christian   church, 

147  seq. 

Jesus  Christ,  relation  of,  to  God  and 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


555 


the  Creation,  170  seq.  ;  the  key  to 
the  problems  of  the  universe,  171 ; 
relation  to  God,  Son,  Word,  Image, 
171  ;  true  both  of  the  pre-existent 
Christ  and  of  the  exalted  God-man, 
173  ;  Christ  the  revelation  of  God, 
174 ;  relation  to  angels,  176  ;  rela- 
tion to  the  world,  its  maker,  177; 
that  it  might  be  the  theatre  of  his 
redemptive  work,  179  ;  relation  to 
mankind,  181  ;  creator  in  his  own 
image,  182 ;  the  ideal  man,  182  ; 
character  attained  through  a  real 
human  development,  184  ;  nature  of 
the  headship  of  the  race,  184  ;  how 
gained,  186 ;  rules  the  universe, 
129.  404. 

Jevons,  science  requires  divine  plan, 
235- 

Jews  to  become  Christians,  517. 

Jew^ish  notions  respecting  justifica- 
tion, 442  ;  persecuting  powers  to  be 
overcome,  511. 

JosEPHUS,  Pharisees  and  Sadducees, 
519- 

Judaism,  relation  to  Christianity,  47. 

Judges,  the  Old  Testament,  93. 

Judgment,  final,  487;  definitely 
taught  in  the  Old  Testament,  526  ; 
particular  and  individual,  526  ;  Jesus 
Christ  the  judge,  the  judgment. 
Christian  judgment,  527  ;  the  divine 
Theodicee,  420,  528  ;  its  minuteness, 
529  ;  begins  the  eternal  age,  and  is 
the  conclusion  of  earthly  history, 
529- 

Justice  of  God,  rooted  in  His  holi- 
ness, 213  ;  distributive  and  general, 
or  rectoral,  386  seq. 

Justification  by  faith,  importance 
of  the  doctrine,  440  ;  justification  or 
the  forgiveness  of  sms,  a  doctrine  of 
the  Old  Testament,  440  ;  the  basis 
and  means  shown  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, 441  ;  full  truth  taught  only  af- 
ter Christ's  ascension,  442  ;  ti  ach- 
ing of  Paul,  442  seq.  ;  a  means  to 
redemption,  445  ;  not  immoral,  446  ; 
not  sanctification,  447  ;  means  sanc- 
tification,  468  seq.  ;  relation  to  re- 
generation and  conversion,  462  seq.  ; 
468  seq.  ;  how  accomplished  by  faith, 
453 ;  accomplishes  personal  union 
with  Christ,  465. 

Kenosis,  158  seq.  ;  Scripture  evi- 
dence, traditional  view,  159 ;  Lu- 
theran   doctrine     and    its    ground. 


160  ;  advantages  and  defects  of  the 
theories,  164  ;  the  problem  insolu- 
ble, 166. 


Kingdom  of  God.  See  Redemption. 
A  redemptive  kingdom,  21,  114;  its 
place  in  theology,  no  ;  the  princi- 
ple of  unity  in  the  Bible,  77  ;  the 
■Summufn  ho/ium,  126  ;  the  purpose 
for  which  man  was  made,  283  ;  the 
chief  end  of  God's  plan  and  man's 
existence,  457  ;  its  meaning  implies 
a  world  of  sin,  in  ;  an  ideal  of  per- 
fection, 112;  and  a  process  of  re- 
demption for  the  realization  of  the 
ideal,  113  ;  its  founding  began  with 
the  fall  of  man,  114  ;  the  Old  Testa- 
ment dispensation  a  preparatory 
stage,  fully  founded  by  Jesus  Christ, 
115  ;  the  actual  work  of  the  kingdom 
begins  after  the  ascension,  116; 
organized  after  a  heavenly,  not 
earthly  order,  116  ;  God  reigns 
through  Christ,  117  ;  the  angels  as- 
sociated with  God  and  Christ,  all 
good  men  belong  to  it,  118  ;  the 
kingdom  is  entered  by  the  new 
birth,  188  ;  is  progressive,  and  spirit- 
ual, 119  ;  with  love  as  its  law,  120; 
all  divine  power  enlisted  for  the 
kingdom,  work  done  by  men,  120  ; 
earlier  stages  used  supernatural 
agencies,  later  came  natural  agen- 
cies, corporate  institutions  are  agen- 
cies, 121  ;  especially  the  family, 
church  and  state,  122  ;  and  all  in- 
dustries, commerce,  and  the  like, 
J23  ;  it  embraces  all  human  inter- 
ests, 123  ;  must  not  be  confined  to 
the  church,  124  ;  is  to  be  established 
on  earth,  125  ;  when  consummated, 
487. 

Kingly  work  of  Christ,  402  seq. ;  a 
necessary  part  of  redemption,  364. 
See  Sanctification.  Its  meaning, 
404  ;  alone  renders  the  atonement 
effectual,  little  exercised  while  on 
earth,  began  with  the  ascension, 
403  ;  constantly  present  and  active 
in  the  world,  embraces  the  whole 
universe,  and  all  departments  of 
human  life,  with  the  purpose  of  the 
salvation  of  men,  1^0^  seq.  ;  more  es- 
pecially in  and  over  his  church,  406  ; 
the  duration  of  the  latter  to  be  eter- 
nal, that  of  the  former,  not,  408  ;  in- 
cludes union  with  the  believer,  465  ; 
executed  through  the  Holy  Spirit, 
408  seq.  ;  as  King,  Jesus  Christ  is  the 
final  Judge,  527. 


556 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


Kings  in  the  theocracy,  94. 
KlNGSLEY,  Charles,  divinity  of  Christ, 

47  ;   demoniacal  possession,  65. 
Knowledge  of  the  Christian,  38. 

Last  judgment.     See  Judgment. 

Law,  in  what  sense  abolished  under 
the  gospel,  467  scq. 

Law,  a  necessity  for  the  brute,  a  stand- 
ard for  man,  310. 

Law  of  God,  definition,  302  ;  known 
by  the  heathen,  303. 

Leibnitz,  Theodicee,  its  defect,  242. 

Lenormant,  251. 

Lessing,  education  and  revelation, 
28. 

Life,  maintained  by  God's  provi- 
dence, 266  ;  a  time  of  decision,  420  ; 
Old  Testament  antithesis  and  mean- 
ing, 482  ;  new  meaning  given  by 
Jesus,  spiritual,  486  scq. 

Likeness  to  God,  in  fact  of  person- 
ality, 288  ;  different  from  image  ? 
291. 

LiMBUs  patrum,  492. 

Livingstone,  goal  of  human  activity, 
124  seq.  ;  working  for  Christ,  405. 

Longfellow,  62,  347. 

Love  implies  personal  relations,  200  ; 
the  communication  of  self  to  others, 
120;  the  sacrifice  of  self  for  others, 
210  ;  the  law  of  the  kingdom,  120  ; 
the  principle  of  the  new  life,  464. 

Love  of  God,  the  same  as  holiness, 
the  essential  principle  of  His  moral 
nature,  210;  the  meaning  of  re- 
demptive love,  217  ;  why  less  fully 
taught  in  Ihe  Old  Testament,  213  ; 
how  emphasized  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, 214  scq.  ;  purpose  of,  to  pro- 
duce love,  218;  error  of  abridging, 
233  seq. 

Lowell,  163. 

Luther,  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  sup- 
per as  ground  of  the  modern  Keno- 
sis  doctrine,  160. 

Lutheran,  early  doctrine  of  unbap- 
tized  infants,  416. 

Luthardt,  "God  is  Holy  Love," 
210. 

Man,  a  mystery,  solved  by  the  Bible, 
282  ;  his  chief  end  redemption,  or 
the  kingdom  of  God,  283  scq.  ;  in 
God's  image,  262  seq. ;  the  normal 


man  a  heavenly,  285  ;  originally 
good,  324  seq.  ;  true  place  of,  in  nat- 
ure, 59 ;  dominion  of,  over  the 
body,  60 ;  and  the  worlcl,  61  ;  made 
for  the  divine  indwelling,  157  ;  for 
fellowship  with  God,  285  ;  subjected 
to  disease  and  death  because  of  sin, 
61  seq.  ;  created  for  Christ,  175  ; 
made  for  redemption,  283  scq. ;  fit- 
ted for  his  destination,  286  ;  by  spe- 
cial creation,  287,  296;  in  God's  im- 
age, 288;  by  his  sonship,  290  seq.; 
Jesus  Christ  his  archetype,  293  seq.  ; 
a  spiritual  being,  296  scq.  ;  made  to 
be  a  unity  of  soul  and  body,  296, 
327,  520  ;  sin  abnormal,  284  ;  free- 
dom of,  as  distinguished  from  the 
brute,  308  ;  not  to  be  understood  in 
his  individuality,  335  ;  the  race  a 
unit,  298  scq. ;  an  organism,  334  ; 
the  race  relation  with  sin.  See  Sin, 
Condition  of,  as  a  sinner,  mastery  of 
creation  lost,  524  ;  unity  of  soul  and 
body  destroyed,  327,  520  ;  is  under 
grace,  343  ;  moral  development  is 
in  a  place  of  probation,  344  ;  con- 
nection with  the  race,  345 ;  doubt- 
less in  the  best  system  for  men  who 
are  to  be  sinners,  346  ;  under  grace 
and  natural  evils,  347  seq.  ;  the  nat- 
ure evident  when  viewed  in  the 
light  of  Christ's  earthly  life,  349. 
The  unconverted  sinner  wholly 
alienated  from  God,  no  middle 
ground,  350 ;  may  perform  good 
deeds  and  have  many  virtues,  352. 
The  imforgiven  sinner  in  a  state  of 
punishment,  355  ;  unable  to  attain 
his  end  apart  from  God's  redemptive 
grace,  336  ;  this  helplessness  a  con- 
dition of  Christ's  redemption,  358  ; 
the  help  ceases  with  this  life,  360. 

Martensen,  necessity  of  the  incar- 
nation, 154  ;  angels,  176. 

Materialism,  unequivocally  exclud- 
ed in  the  Bible,  295  scq. 

Matter,  requires  a  creator,  11  ;  not 
eternal,  249,  256;  a  constant  in  the 
universe,  because  God  behind  it, 
266  ;  heathen  and  Christian  view  of, 
yet  to  be  redeemed,  181  ;  not  the 
origin  of  sin,  307  ;  is  good,  521. 

Maxwell,  Clerk.  God  necessary  to 
philosophy,  10. 

Men,  known  by  their  self-revelation, 
2.  3- 

Messiah,  prophecies  of,  132  ;  a  suf- 
fering a  foundation  for  atonement, 
370  ;  coronation  of,  144. 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


657 


Mill,  the  Will,  310. 

Millenium,    mentioned   in   but   one 

passage,    512  ;  various    theories   of, 

512  scj. 

MiLTOX,  43S,  541. 

Minister,  Christian,  to  persuade 
men  to  make  trial  of  Christianity, 
41- 

Miracles,  meaning,  evidence  dis- 
credited, used  with  timidity,  reason 
therefor,  58  ;  moral  meaning  over- 
looked, a  part  of  redemption,  59 ; 
pre-suppose  disturbance  of  the  order 
of  physical  nature  by  sin,  59  seg.  ; 
are  a  divine  restoration  of  the  true 
order  of  nature,  63  ;  miracles  of 
judgment  restore  the  powers  of  nat- 
ure to  their  true  use,  of  mercy  a 
restoration  of  man's  dominion  over 
nature,  65  ;  their  purpose  is  to  re- 
veal God  as  the  God  of  redemption, 
66 ;  a  revelation  in  works,  essential 
part  of  the  revelation  of  redemption, 
67;  pledges  of  the  redemption  of 
nature,  69.  Have  ceased  as  the 
supernatural  revelation  has  ceased, 
71 ;  nature  to  be  restored  as  the  re- 
sult of  a  spiritual  redemption,  71 
seq.  ;  a  proof  of  Christianit3\  their 
nature,  a  part  of  the  revelation,  value 
to  spectators,  to  believers  now,  50  ; 
criteria,  51. 

Mis^ONS,  nature  and  motives  of,  125, 
423- 

MiVART,  origin  of  man,  297. 

MONOPHYSITES,  I49. 

Monotheism,  bare  of  Unitarianism 
not  found  in  the  ethnic  religions, 
cannot  satisfy  the  heart,  205. 

MoNTANiSTS,  513. 

Moral  attributes  of  God,  15  ;  moral 
development  of  Christ,  184  scq.  ; 
moral  influence  theory  of  the  atone- 
ment, 386  scq.  ;  moral  proof  of  God's 
existence,  6,  7. 

Moral  system,  this,  its  excellences 
and  dangers,  346  scq.  ;  moral  train- 
ing of  men  by  probation,  325. 

Moses,  93. 

MfjLLER,  Max,  thought  needs  words, 
172. 

Names  of  God,  significance,  192. 

Natural  man,  350  ;  "  Natural  man  " 
of  the  theologians,  343  ;  natural  rev- 
elation   of  God,   modes  of,  4  seq.  ; 


contents  of,  12  seq.  ;  insufficient  on 
account  of  sin,  19. 

Natural  and  spiritual,  relation  of, 
68  ;  natural  selection,  297. 

Nature,  physical,  a  similitude  of 
God,  a  revelation,  262  ;  character  of 
its  laws,  269  ;  common'order  of,  not 
the  true  order,  a  false  order  caused 
by  sin,  63;  not  sin,  yet  leading  to 
sin,  337  ;  to  be  redeemed,  69,  as  the 
result  of  spiritual  redemption,  71  ; 
man's  relation  to,  524. 

Neandek,  224. 

Nestorians,  149. 

New  Life,  goal  of  the  redemptive 
work,  457  ;  begins  with  the  change 
of  heart,  457  ;  nature  and  greatness 
of  the  change,  458;  twofold  aspect, 
regeneration  and  conversion,  459  ; 
means,  persuasion  of  the  truth,  con- 
version, 461  ;  relations,  result  a  new 
man,  464  ;  factors  of  the  new  life, 
personal  and  spiritual  union  of  the 
believer  with  Christ,  465  ;  indwell- 
ing of  the  Holy  Spirit,  faith,  466  ; 
fellowship  of  Christians,  467 ;  pro- 
cess of,  see  Sanctification,  Voca- 
tion unto  special  service,  472.  See 
also  Perseverance,  and  Assurance. 

New  man,  the  result  of  a  change  of 
heart  with  a  principle  of  love,  464. 

New  England,  doctrine  of  original  sin, 
333  ;  theology  and  theory  of  the 
atonement,  386 ;  theology,  origin, 
defects,  causes  of  its  decline,  533 
seq. 

New  Testament,  authorship  of  its 
writings,  99  ;  relation  of,  to  the  Old 
Testament,  77,  31  seq. ;  by  what 
teaching  joined,  no;  contrasts  with 
Old  Testament  in  teaching  of  God, 
211  seq.  ;  dispensation  universal, 
216 ;  forgiveness  in,  442,  441  seq.  ; 
election  in,  426  ;  teaching  of  im- 
mortality, 486  ;  prophecy  similar  to 
Old  Testament  prophecy,  508  scq. 

Nice,  Council  of,  148  ;  creed  of,  149. 

Noah,  496. 

Obedience  of  brutes  to  law,  and  of 
men,  310. 

Oehler,  "  Wisdom  of  God,"  234. 

Offices  of  Christ,  363. 

Old  Testament,  its  form  due  to  the 
Jewish  church,  8t  ;  authorship  of 
its  writings,  99  ;  Canon,  books  of, 
admitted  on    grounds    of   national 


558 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


tradition,  and  closely  connected 
with  the  national  history,  also  in 
organic  relation  with  redemptive 
revelation,  disclose  the  immediate 
impression  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  sanc- 
tioned by  Christ,  82 ;  relation  to 
the  New  Testament,  31  scq.,  77  ;  by 
what  teaching  joined,  no  ;  contrast- 
ed teaching  respecting  God,  211 
set/.;  particularism,  223;  reason  of, 
216 ;  prophecies  and  types  in  the 
New  Testament,  507  seq.  ;  fulfil- 
ments of,  517  ;  limited  in  revelation 
of  immortality,  483  ;  reason,  485  ; 
forgiveness  in,  440  seq. ;  teaching 
of  election,  424  ;  salvation  of  Old 
Testament  saints,  415. 

Omniscienck,  more  than  foreknowl- 
edge, 237  ;  includes  the  free  acts  of 
men,  236. 

Ontological  argument,  11,  12  ;  at- 
tribute of  God,  13. 

Optimism  of  Leibnitz,  and  New  Eng- 
land theologians,  242. 

Orelli,  Jesus  and  the  Old  Testament 
law,  32. 

Origen,  pre-existence,  300;  theory 
of  ransom,  383. 

Original  sin,  330  seq. ;  Chap.  xvii. 
301  seq. 

Original  state  of  man,  324  seq. 

Other  life,  the  limitations  of  knowl- 
edge of,  source  of  knowledge,  476. 
See  Immortality,  Intermediate  State. 
Progressive,  417. 

Pain,  its  place,  347  jc^. 

Pantheism,  no  God  of  providence, 
265  ;  the  truth  in  it,  268. 

Pantheistic  philosophy  overmatch- 
ed, 531- 

Papacy,  the  persecuting,  a  type  of 
antichrist,  516. 

Paradise,  symbolic  meaning  of  ex- 
pulsion from,  326. 

Pardon,  offered  on  condition  of 
faith  in  Christ,  2,7. 

Parousia,  not  at  Christ's  first  com- 
ing, nor  spiritual  presence  in  the 
world,  506  seq. 

Particularism  of  Old  Testament, 
216. 

Pascal,  51. 

Paul's  philosophy,  170;  his  doctrine 
of  justification,  442. 

Pelagius,  doctrine  of  sin,  331. 


Penal  substitution  theory  of  atone- 
ment, 384. 

Pentecost,  its  significance,  96,  145. 

Perfection,  not  attained  in  this  life, 
469  ;  criticism  of  theories  of,  470. 

Permission  of  sin.     See  Plan. 

Permissive  decree  of  God,  239  seq. 

Perseverance,  teaching  of  Script- 
ure, 473 ;  objection  and  answers, 
474  -fY- 

Personality,  the  likeness  of  men  to 
God,  its  meaning,  288  seq. 

Ph.\risees,  519. 

Philosophy,  necessity  of,  170  ;  and 
Scripture,  on  the  nature  of  man,  294 
seq. :  its  treatment  of  the  problem 
of  evil,  242  seq.  ;  of  Greece  and 
Rome,  once  attained  a  theistic  con- 
ception of  God,  16.  Of  theology, 
the  region  of  controversies,  199. 

Physical  science,  dealing  with  the 
past  history  of  the  world,  251  ;  re- 
specting the  origin  of  men,  296  seq. 

Physical  nature,  not  the  origin  of 
sin,  307. 

Plan  of  God,  belongs  also  to  philoso- 
phy and  science,  228  ;  nature  of, 
originated  in  the  holy  love  of  the 
triune  God,  229  ;  included  redemp- 
tion, and  sin,  230,  iii  ;  has  special 
relation  to  Christ,  is  a  unit,  all 
comprehensive,  231  ;  unchangeable, 
232;  eternal,  433;  free,  233;  rela- 
tion of  the  plan  to  the  physical 
world,  234  ;  to  freedom,  235  ;  estab- 
lished freedom,  236  ;  includes  free 
acts  and  choices  of  men,  how  ac- 
cordant, 237 ;  relation  to  human 
sin,  238  ;  God  absolute,  sin  exists  by 
His  permission  in  His  wisdom,  239  ; 
reason  for  the  permission  of  sin, 
and  various  theories,  241  seq.  ;  the 
plan  must  be  regarded  in  relation  to 
redemption,  value  of  moral  free- 
dom, 244  ;  no  theodicy  yet  com- 
plete, necessity  of  faith,  originated, 
carried  on  and  to  be  consummated 
in  holy  love,  246  ;  not  an  essential 
doctrine,  246  ;  every  Christian's  life 
a  plan  of  God,  472. 

Plato,  argument  for  immortality,  478 
seq. 

Platonic     philosophy,     relation    to 
Christianity,   49  ;  matter   evil,   521  ; 
realism  and  sin,  330. 
Pope,  chance,  275. 
Prayer,  relation  to  God's  providence, 


INDEX   OP   SUBJECTS 


559 


275    seq.  ;  proper     use   of,    276  ;    a 

means  of  grace,  411. 
Preceptive  will  of  God,  240. 
Predestination.     See  Election. 

Prediction,  an  essential  element  of 
prophecy,  as  a  proof  of  Christianity, 
51.  S2. 

Pkk-kxistrnce  of  men,  300;  of 
Christ,  133  seq. 

Pkk-mii.lennial  coming  of  Christ, 
statement  and  criticism  of  doctrine, 
5i3-f<'4'- 

Present  tendencies  of  theological 
thought  in  the  Congregational 
churches  of  the  United  States,  and 
past  history,  533  seq. 

Preservation,  creation  sustained 
only  by  the  constant  e.xercise  of 
God's  power,  265  ;  matter,  energy, 
life,  266  ;  and  the  human  spirit  due 
to  this  power,  267. 

Presumptuous  sins,  316. 

Priesthood  of  the  Old  Testament, 
367  seq. 

Priestly  work  of  Christ,  a  necessary 
part  of  the  redemption,  364.  See 
Atonement. 

Probation,  moral  development 
under,  344  ;  Butler's  definition,  345  ; 
nature  and  purpose,  325  ;  real  nat- 
ure revealed  by  Christ's  earthly  life, 
349  seq.  ;  not  a  right  to  be  claimed, 
496  ;  extended  or  future,  418  ;  the 
theory  a  right  to  exist,  419  ;  a  specu- 
lation, 501  ;  not  satisfactory,  419  ; 
nor  probable,  495  seq. 

Prodigal  son,  meaning  of  the 
parable,  441. 

Progressive  incarnation,  162. 

Prophecy  as  proof  of  Christianity, 
51  ;  nature  of,  505,  507  ;  nature  of 
its  fulfilments,  507  ;  of  Old  Testa- 
ment and  New  Testament,  similar 
in  character,  perspective  of,  508. 

Prophets,  in  theocracy,  94  ;  self- 
consciousness  not  overborne,  97. 

Prophetic  work  of  Christ,  a  neces- 
sary part  of  redemption,  reveals 
God's  stoning  love,  and  character, 
365  ;  man's  true  nature,  pledges  the 
redemption  of  nature,  366. 

Protestant  and  Catholic  countries 

contrasted,  55. 
Protestantism     based     upon     the 

Bible,  87. 


Providence  of  God,  subject  impor- 
tant, fully  taught  in  the  Bible,  264  ; 
the  Christian  doctrine  is  thcistic, 
265.  See  Government,  Preserva- 
tion, Immanence.  Providence  uni- 
versal, special,  274  ;  no  chance  ;  re- 
lation to  prayer,  276  ;  to  sin  ;  provi- 
dence the  execution  of  God's  plan  in 
time,  277  ;  the  chief  end  is  redemp- 
tion, 278  ;  shared  by  each  of  the 
Trinity,  279. 

Psalms,  value  of,  78. 

Psychological  proof  of  God's  exist- 
ence, 7,  8;  indicates  personality,  14 
seq. 

Psychology  in  Scripture,  295. 

Punishment,  a  reaction  of  God's 
nature  against  sin,  correlative  with 
guilt,  317  ;  the  natural  consequences 
of  sin,  including  death,  commensu- 
rate with  guilt,  retributive,  primarily 
a  means  of  reclaiming  the  sinner, 
318  ;  later  of  nullifying  the  effect  of 
sin,  closely  related  to  the  atone- 
ment, 319  ;  its  function  in  this  life, 
348  ;  future,  an  exclusion  from  sal- 
vation because  of  sin  freely  com- 
mitted, 429. 

Purgatory,  distinguished  from  the 
intermediate  state,  doctrine  criti- 
cized, 498. 

Race  of  Man,  an  organism,  344. 
Raleigh,    Dr.,    evolutionary    theory 
of  sin,  307. 

Ransom,  theory  of  atonement,  383. 

Realism  of  Plato,  330. 

Reason  furnishes  test  for  Christian- 
ity, power  limited,  44. 

Reconciliation,  true  nature  of, 
397 ;  reconciliation  theory  of  the 
atonement,  388. 

Records  of  the  Past,  249. 

Pectoral  justice  of  God,  386. 

Redemptive  love,  character  of,  217. 

Redemptive  revelation,  the  best 
designation  of  the  Christian  revela- 
tion, named  from  its  purpose,  as- 
sumes universal  revelation,  18  ; 
necessary  on  account  of  sin,  19  ;  to 
supply  a  real  and  correct  knowledge 
of  God,  20  ;  a  means  to  redemption, 
or  the  Kingdom  of  God,  no  after- 
thought, 21  ;  contents  of,  primarily  a 
disclosure  of  God,  recorded  in  the 
Bible,  22  ;  especially  of  God  as  Re- 
deemer,   as    perfect    love,    23 ;    as 


560 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


Father,  Son,  and  as  Spirit,  a  mani- 
festation of  God's  work  of  grace  as 
Father,  Son,  and  Spirit,  24  ;  method 
of  revelation,  25  ;  supernatural,  not 
provided  for  in  the  natural  revela- 
tion, 26 ;  began  with  individuals, 
based  upon  election,  27 ;  educa- 
tional, 28 ;  progressive,  an  evolu- 
tion, 30  ;  the  earlier  stages  relatively 
imperfect,  32 ;  the  Old  Dispensa- 
tion the  first  stage,  God  revealed  at 
second-hand,  32  ;  the  New  Dispen- 
sation, God  revealed  in  the  Son,  the 
consummation  of  the  redemptive 
revelation,  33  seq. ;  a  new  revela- 
tion hereafter  ?  35  ;  this  revelation 
the  unifying  principle  of  the  organ- 
ism of  the  Bible,  76  ;  of  words  and 
of  works,  67;  definition  of,  mode  of 
transmission  of  the  earlier  stages, 
79;  to  be  expected  from  God,  42; 
worthy  of  Him,  suited  to  the  needs 
of  men,  43  ;  adds  new  and  higher 
facts  respecting  God's  providence, 
277  seq. 

Redemptive  work  of  Christ.  See 
Atonement,  Holy  Spirit,  Justifica- 
tion, Kingly  Work,  Sanctification. 
The  parts  of  the  work  and  their  re- 
lations, 402  seq. ;  meaning  of  re- 
demption, 361  ;  beginnings  of  pro- 
vision for  redemption,  362  ;  the  three 
offices  of  Christ,  363  ;  necessity  of 
keeping  all  in  mind,  center  in  the 
atonement,  364  ;  revelation,  364  ;  in 
teaching,  in  his  person,  365  ;  in  his 
example,  and  in  his  miracles,  366  ; 
his  priestly  work,  367  seq.  ;  scope  of 
the  redemptive  work,  411  ;  provision 
for  salvation  universal,  412  ;  the  race 
brought  into  relations  of  grace,  413  ; 
salvation  of  Old  Testament  saints, 
415;  of  infants,  416  ;  of  heathen,  417 
seq. 

Redemption,  kingdom  of,  the  same 
as  the  kingdom  of  God,  21  ;  re- 
demption the  process  of  the  actuali- 
zation of  the  kingdom  of  God,  113  ; 
the  largeness  of  the  Scriptural  idea, 
20,  67,  361  ;  revelation  of,  67  ;  to 
restore  the  pristine  beauty  and 
perfectness  of  the  image  of  God  and 
to  develop  it,  292  ;  embraces  pri- 
marily the  spiritual,  secondarily 
what  is  called  the  secular,  123  seq.  ; 
includes  the  body,  520  seq.  ;  the  key 
to  Old  Testament  prophecy,  507; 
a  purpose  of  creation,  263  ;  the  pur- 
pose for  which  man  was  made,  283  ; 
the  goal  of  the  divine  plan,  230  ;  the 


chief  end  of  God's  plan  and  of  man's 
existence,  457  ;  no  afterthought,  113, 
284,  327  ;  implies  that  man  was 
made  to  love  God,  284  ;  to  have 
communion  with  Him,  and  is  for 
Christ,  285  ;  it  is  for  the  race,  and 
implies  supremacy  over  nature,  286  ; 
the  chief  end  of  God's  providence, 
278  ;  that  which  throws  light  on  the 
problem  of  evil,  244  ;  implies  exist- 
ence of  sin,  284 ;  presupposes  the 
helplessness  of  the  sinner,  359  ; 
ground  of  redemption,  326,  328  ; 
present  Congregational  thought  on, 
542. 
Regeneration,  nature  of,  agent  in, 
459  seq.  ;  by  Christ  through  the 
Spirit,  410 ;  relation  to  conversion, 
justification  and  faith,  462  seq.  ;  468 
seq.  ;  not  physical,  460  ;  is  "  effectual 
calling,"  461  ;  effects  internal  spiri- 
tual union  with  Christ,  465  ;  means 
sanctification,  46S  seq. 

Religions  of  the  ancient  world,  re- 
lation to  Christianity,  49 

Religious  proof  of  God's  existence, 
5,  6 ;  attribute  of  God,  love,  re- 
vealed in  religious  experience,  15, 
16. 

Repentance,  of  God,  232. 

Resurrection  and  ascension  of 
Christ,  the  coronation  of  the  Mes- 
siah, 144. 

Resurrection,  487 ;  the  double, 
515  ;  of  the  dead,  Old  Testament 
hints,  519  ;  a  physical  redemption, 
deliverance  from  the  power  of  death, 
520 ;  of  an  identical  body,  522  ;  a 
completion  of  redemption,  523;  life 
in  resurrection  body,  524  ;  of  un- 
believers, 525. 

Revelation.  See  Prophetic  Work 
of  Christ,  Redemptive  revelation. 
Meaning  of,  2  ;  implies  a  revealer 
and  a  mind  able  to  receive  it.  con- 
ditioned by  the  receptivity  of  the 
mind,  25  ;  of  God  within  the  reach 
of  all  men,  not  rightly  interpreted 
by  all,  yet  once  so  done,  16  ;  in 
Christ  illuminates  the  natural  reve- 
lation, 17  ;  needed  to  make  known 
the  character  of  God,  209,  211  seq.  ; 
a  prerequisite  to  the  redemptive 
work,  402  ;  in  Old  Testament  limited 
as  to  immortality,  484. 

Righteousness  of  God  His  forgiving 
grace,  445. 

Roman  persecuting  powers,  511. 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


661 


Romans,  Epistle  to,  78. 

Roman  Catholic,  doctrine  of  justifica- 
tion, 447  ;  of  unbaptized  infants,  of 
release  from  Hades,  416;  oflimbus 
patrum,  492  ;  of  purgatory,  498  scq.  ; 
countries  contrasted  with  Protestant, 
55  ;  religion  not  anti-Christian,  516. 

RoMK,  church  of,  not  the  kingdom  of 
God,  120. 

Rup;':rt  of  Deutz,  153. 

.Sabkllianism,  194. 

Sacraments,  means  of  grace,  411. 

Sacrificial  system  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, 368  scq. 

Sadducees,  519. 

Salvation.  See  redemption.  When 
complete,  414  scq.  ;  includes  good 
works,  469  ;  beginning  and  comple- 
tion of,  445  seq. 

Samson,  94. 

Saul,  94. 

Sanctification,  distinguished  from 
justification,  447  ;  faith  essential  for, 
455  ;  by  Christ  through  the  spirit, 
410  ;  relation  to  justification  and  re- 
generation, 468  ;  not  attained  in  this 
life,  469  seq. 

Satisfaction  theory  of  the  atone- 
ment, 383  seq. 

Saumur,  mediate  imputation,  332. 

Science  accords  with  Scripture  as  to 

divine  plan,  234  seq.  ;    original  sin, 

335- 
Scientific    evolution    and    Biblical 

cosmogony,  250,   255  ;   tendency   ht 

re  the  will,  309  seq. 

Scriptures.     See  Holy  Scriptures. 

Second  Advents,  513. 

Second  Coming  of  Christ,  487 ;  the 
consummation  of  the  kingdom,  125, 
519  ;  Christ's  language  concerning, 
505  ;  ushers  in  the  last  day,  517 ; 
consummation  of  redemptive  pro- 
cess, time  uncertain,  in  kingly  glory, 
518  ;  the  day  of  the  Lord,  519  ;  in 
prophecy,  508. 

Self,  known  by  self-revelation,  2-4. 

Sf.lf-consciousness,   how  possible 

in    men,   206  ;   in  God  through   the 

Trinity,  207. 
Selfishness,  nature  of,  210,  305  ;  not 

self-love,  305  ;  the  positive  element 

in  sin,  304. 


Sblf-love,  not  selfishness,  305. 

Semi-Ari.\nism,    19s  ;     Semi-Arians, 

148. 
Shaddai,  El,  192. 

Sheol,  483;   as  a  place,  491;  mean- 
ing, 493- 
Shekinah,  131. 

Sin,  nature  of,  301  seq.,  458  ;  to  be 
understood  in  the  light  of  redemp- 
tion, 301  ;  disobedience  to  the  di- 
vine will,  302 ;  rejection  of  the  God 
of  redemption,  selfishness,  304  ;  un- 
christlikeness,  essential  principle, 
abuse  of  human  freedom,  306  seq.  ; 
sins  of  state  and  of  act,  311  seq.  See 
Guilt.  Relation  to  punishment,  317  ; 
to  atonement,  319  ;  gravity  of,  320  ; 
universal,  321  seq.  ;  began  with  the 
fall,  323  seq.  ;  the  results  and  penal- 
ties, 325  ;  immediately  followed  by 
grace,  326  ;  connection  between  the 
fall  and  the  universality,  328  ;  theo- 
ries of  original  sin,  -^jpseq.  ;  the  race 
an  organism,  334  ;  man  more  than 
an  individual,  heredit)^  335  ;  envi- 
ronment, freedom,  336  ;  their  rela- 
tion to  sin,  337  ;  to  Adam's  sin  and 
universal  sin,  341  ;  effects  of  sin, 
112  ;  on  the  spiritual  perception, 
19  ;  disturbs  man's  true  relations 
with  nature,  61  seq.  ;  disturbs  the 
order  of  physical  nature,.  59;  the 
cause  of  death,  327,  392,  520  ;  ef- 
fects of,  to  be  removed  by  salvation, 
414  seq.  ;  its  existence  implied  in 
man's  destination  for  redemption, 
not  an  essential  idea  in  man,  an 
abuse  of  his  faculties,  abnormal, 
284  ;  the  anomaly  of  the  universe, 
320  ;  included  in  the  divine  plan, 
and  provided  for,  21,  iii,  156,  230, 
238  seq.  ;  must  always  be  consid- 
ered in  connection  with  redemption, 
244 ;  relation  to  God's  providence, 
277  ;  minimized  when  God's  holiness 
is  abridged,  221  ;  useful  or  necessary 
in  a  moral  system  ?  242  ;  sin  of  im- 
perfection in  heaven  ?  499. 

Sin,  present  Congregational  thought 
about,  542. 

Sinner,  man's  condition  as,  343  seq.  ; 
as  a  converted  sinner,  state  of  con- 
verted sinner  under  divine  law,  467 
seq. 

Smith,  H.  B.,  meaning  of  the  relig- 
ion of  the  agnostic,  13  ;  God's 
glory  as  a  motive,  230  ;  divine  love 
and  holiness,  210. 


562 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


Socrates,  why  his  teaching  failed, 
365. 

Son,  is  God,  191  ;  the  executor  of 
creation,  260 ;  subordination  of,  198. 

SoNSHiP  in  God,  meaning  of,  171. 

Son  of  man,  meaning,  139  seq. 

SoNSHiP  of  man,  the  scriptural  con- 
ception of  his  nature,  290;  is  the 
image  of  God,  remains  in  fallen 
man,  292. 

Sorrow,  place  in  this  world,  347  seq. 

Soul  and  body,  made  to  be  a  unit, 
296.  327.  520. 

Special  providence,  274. 

Speculation,  limitations  and  uses, 
152  seq. 

Spkncer,  respecting  the  absolute, 
12  ;  the  will,  310. 

Spirit  of  Christ,  136  j^^.  ,•  an  earnest 
of  the  physical  redemption,  521. 

Spirit  of  God.      See  Holy  Spirit. 

Spirit  of  man,  preserved  by  God's 
providence,  267. 

Spiritual  Ijody,  meaning  of,  523; 
spiritual  conception  of  Christianity 
among  Congregationalists,  536  ;  life, 
486,  death,  327,  487  ;  and  natural 
relation  of,  68. 

Spiritualistic  theory  of  man  im- 
plied in  the  Bible,  295. 

Spontaneity,  not  true  freedom,  289. 

Stanley,  405. 

State,  and  the  kingdom,  122. 

Stephen,  view  of  Christ,  145. 

Study  of  the  Bible,  importance  of, 
88  ;  to  be  under  the  guidance  of 
God's  Spirit,  in  the  light  of  e.xpe- 
rience,  and  the  teachings  of  the 
Christian  church,  89  ;  close  and  crit- 
ical, with  the  recognition  of  the  his- 
torical and  progressive  nature  of 
revelation,  90  ;  the  results,  91. 

Suffering,  reason  for,  180  seq. 

Substitution,  symbolic  in  Old  Tes- 
tament sacrificial  system,  368  seq.  ; 
penal  theory  of  atonement,  384. 

Substitutionary  death  of  Christ, 
taught  in  the  New  Testament,  372 
seq. 

Supernatural  agencies,  indispen- 
sable for  revelation,  used  with  wise 
economy,  26;  and  natural,  not  con- 
flicting, become  incorporated,  a  heal- 
ing and  restorative  element,  27. 


Supreme,  end,  312  ;  choice,  313  seq. 
Systematic  theology,  no. 

Taine,  129. 

Taylor,     Dr.     Nathaniel,    theodicy, 

243  ;  the  will,  309;  original  sin,  333 

seq. 

Teleoi.ogical  argument  for  God's 
existence,  8,  9  ;  indicates  personal- 
ity, 14.  IS- 

Temptation,  the  first,  nature  of,  325 
seq. 

Tendencies  of  present  Congrega- 
tional theological  thought,  533  seq. 

Tennyson,  130,  264. 

Testimonium  Spiritus  Sancti,  40, 
539- 

TheodiCEB,  of  Leibnitz,  Taylor,  242  ; 
the  complete  not  yet  thought  out, 
246  ;  final  judgment,  the  great,  420, 
528. 

Theistic  natural  theology,  i  seq., 
278. 

Theologian,  test  of,  228. 

Theological,  philosophical  and 
physical  science,  294  seq. 

Theology,  fundamental,  systematic, 
no  ;  Christian,  assumes  the  reality 
and  truth  of  universal  revelation, 
18  ;  difficulties  of,  129  ;  proper  spirit 
of  study  of,  130  ;  Christocentric,  or 
theocentric  ?  188  ;  neglected,  new 
interest  in,  534. 

Thirty-nine  Articles,  predestination 
and  election,  439. 

Thomasius,  160. 

Thoughtful  Christian,  test  of,  228. 

Total  depravity,  a  wrong  supreme 
choice,  351. 

Traducianism,  299. 

Trench,  127  seq. 

Trichotomy,  not  proved  from 
Scripture,  296. 

Trinity,  the  doctrine  most  sacred, 
189  ;  Scripture  doctrine  rooted  in 
Old  Testament,  189  ;  why  the  unity 
emphasized  in  the  Old  Testament, 
190;  Old  Testament  elements,  the- 
ophanies,  predictions  of  the  Mes- 
siah, Spirit  of  God,  New  Testament 
teaching  wholly  trinitarian,  191  ; 
meaning  of  the  names  of  God,  193  ; 
of  baptism  into  the  Trinity,  193  ; 
the  doctrine  held  at  first  by  Chris- 
tians without  reflection,  193  ;  devel- 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


563 


oped  by  controversy,  heretical  ten- 
dencies, 194  ;  the  essential  points  of 
the  orthodox  doctrine,  195  ;  triper- 
sonal  and  unipersonal,  196  ;  denotes 
relations  within  the  Trinity  as  well 
as  to  the  world  and  men,  197  seq.  ; 
doctrine  reveals  God  not  as  bare 
unity,  but  as  having  fulness  of  life, 
199  ;  is  love  which  implies  personal 
relations,  this  in  God  explains  the 
Trinity,  200  ;  relations  within  the 
Trinity,  meaning  of  Fatherhood 
and  Sonship,  201.  The  doctrine 
reasonable,  202  seq.  ;  though  it  con- 
tains an  element  of  incomprehensi- 
bility is  not  pre-eminently  mysteri- 
ous, 203  ;  analogies  against  the  Uni- 
tarian view,  reasonable  as  compared 
with  the  ethnic  religions,  204  ;  unites 
the  truths  in  the  various  philosoph- 
ical theories,  205  ;  accords  with 
Christian  experience,  207  ;  each  of 
the  Trinity  concerned  in  provi- 
dence, 279. 

Tritheism,  195. 

Truth  of  God,  rooted  in  His  holiness, 
213. 

Truth,  the  means  especially  em- 
ployed in  regeneration,  460. 

Unchangeableness  of  God,  232. 

Union  with  Christ,  nature  and  ef- 
fects. Scripture  teaching  concern- 
ing, 465- 

Unitarian  controversy,  540. 

Universality  of  sin,  a  fact,  322  scq.  ; 
the  reason,  323  seq. 

Universe  ruled  by  Christ,  129,  404. 


Vicarious,  death  of  Christ  taught, 
372  scq.  ;  idea  in  the  Old  Testament 
sacrifices,  369  seq.     See  Atonement. 

Virtues,  natural,  their  value,  352. 

Vocation,  the  Christian,  472. 

Volition,  not  choice,  312. 

Wallace,  origin  of  man,  297. 

Wesley,  perfection,  471. 

Westminster  Catechism,  definition 
of  God,  17  ;  person  of  Christ,  150  ; 
God's  plan,  232  seq.  ;  chief  end  of 
man,  283  ;  sin,  302  ;  degrees  of  guilt, 
316  ;  effectual  calling,  461  ;  future 
life,  500. 

Westminster  Confession,  God  the 
supreme  authority,  88  ;  so  the  Holy 
Spirit  speaking  through  Scripture, 
91  ;  calls  the  pope  antichrist,  516. 

Whedon,  perfection,  471. 

Whittier,  Trinitas,  208. 


Will.      See    Choice, 

Freedom.    Augustin 

of    Pelagius,    331  ; 

sense  of,  240. 
Wisdom  of  God,  232. 

Word,   means  of  regeneration,  460  ; 
of  grace,  411. 

World,  known  by  its 
2,  3 ;    made    to    be 
Christ's  redemptive 
be  redeemed,  503. 

Wrath  of  God,  355  ;  a  matter  of  de 
gree,  356. 


Determinism, 

.'s  doctrine  that 

God's,  twofold 


self-revelation, 
the  theatre  of 
work,   179  ;    to 


II.    IKDEX   OF   SCRIPTURE   PAS- 
SAGES 


Genesis. 

Chap.  Page 

i 248,  287 

i.  2 202 

i.  24,  26 287 

i.  31 182 

ii 287,  323  seq. 

ii.  7 267,  287,  298 

ii.  19  287 

iii 323  ''eq. 

iii-   15 132 

V.  1,3 292 

vi.  7,  8  ;   vii.  21 299 

vii.  22 287 

viii.  I  seq 299 

viii.  22 266 

ix.  6 292 

xii.  1-3 425 

xii.  3 132 

XV.  6 415,  425 

xvii.  I 192 

xviii.  18 132 

xviii.  25 212 

xxii.  II,  12,  15 131 

xxii.  18 132 

XXV.  8 483 

XXV.  22,  23 425 

xxvi.  4,  xxviii.   14...  132 
xxxi.    II,    13 ;    xxxii. 

30 131 

xxxv.  29 483 

xlv.  5-8 273 

xlix.  10 132 

xlix.  29,  33 483 

Exodus. 


Chap.  Page 

xxiv.  3-8 373 

xxxi.  14 484 

xxxii.  30 371 

xxxiii.  14 131 

xxxiv.  6,  7 441 

xxxiv,  27,  28 loi 

Leviticus. 

V.  10 316 

xvii,  II 369 

XX.  7,  26 212 

XXV.  47-55 372 

Numbers. 

xi.  17  f'-'; 93 

xi.  25-27 94 

XV.  30 316 

xviii.  15,  16 372 

xxi.  4-9 374 

xxiv.  17  seq 132 

XXV.  13 371 

xxxiii.  2 loi 

xxxv.  31,  32 ,     372 

Deuteronomy. 

vi.  4 190,  449 

vii.  6-8 425 

X.  IS 213 

xxvii.  26 443 

xxxi.  19 loi 

xxxii.  6,  19 213 

xxxii.  21 137 

Judges. 


111.  2,  4 131  vi.  24  ;    xi.   29  ;    xiii. 

iii.  II,  12  ;  iv.  1-23. .     93  25 

vi.  3 192 

-^v"-  14 i°i  I  Samuel. 

XX.  3 190 

XX.  5,  6 441  X.    6;   xvi.    13;    xix. 

XX    12 484  23,  24 


94 


94 


2  Samuel. 
Chap.  Pnge 

vii.  12-16,  25 132 

xxiii.  2 94 

I  Kings. 
viii.  46 322 

Nehemiah. 
ix.  20,  30 94 

Job. 

iii.  13-19;  X.  21,  22.  483 

xix.  25-27 484 

xxxiv.  14,   15 267 

PSAI.MS. 

ii 132.  405.  508 

v.  12 322 

xvi.  10,  II  ;  xvii.  15.  485 

xix,  1 261 

xix,  12,  13 316 

xxii.   28 273 

xxxii.  9 290 

xxxvi,  6 267 

xlv.  ...    132 

xlv.  6,  7 137 

xlix.   15 485 

1.  21 221 

Ixv.  9,  10 268 

Ixvi.  9 , 267 

Ixxii 132 

Ixxiii.  23-26 485 

Ixxvi.  10 273 

Ixxxvii.  2 213 

Ixxxviii.  5;  xciv.  17.  483 

xcviii.  9 132 

cii.  25-27 137 

civ.  29,  30 266 

ex 132 

cxv.  17 483 

cxi.x.  96 443 


INDEX  TO   SCRIPTURE   PASSAC4ES 


[)65 


Chap.  Page 

cxix.  105 91 

cxxxv.  6 271 

Proverbs. 

viii.  14 40 

viii.  22-26 234 

xvi.  9 273 

xvi.  33 275 

ECCLESI.VSTES. 

iii.  II 12,  480 

IS.\I.'\H. 

vi.  3 209 

viii.  I loi 

ix.  6,  7 132  se^. 

xi.  2 94 

xi.  6-9 5f2 

xiii.  6-14 517 

xi V.  9-20 483 

xxvi.  19  485,  519 

xxx.   8 loi 

XXXV 512 

XXXV.    4 132 

xxxviii.  II 483 

xl.-lxvi 133 

xl.  3,  10 132 

xl.  13 137 

xlii.  1 94,  426 

liii 133 

liii.  7-10 374 

Iv.  1 412 

Ivii.  IS 158 

Ix 512 

Ixi.  I   94.  95 

Ixiii.  9 131 

Ixv.  23 512 

Ixvi.   24 485 

Jeremiah. 

xxx.    I,  2 lOI 

xxxi.  9,  20 213 

xx.xi.  31-34- -33    373.  442 
xxxvi.  2 loi 

EZEKIEL. 

ii.  2 94 

xxiv.  I,  2 loi 

■  xxxvii.  1-14 515 

xxxvii.  12-14 519 

Daniel. 
iv.  25 273 

vii.  13  seq. .   133,  140,  518 

ix.  24-27 133 

xii.  2 485,  519,  525 


HOSEA. 
Chap.  Page 

vi.    2 519 

ix-  7 94 

xiu.    14 5x9 

Joel. 

i.  28,  29 94 

i-  29-32 517 

i-  32 137 

ii-  14-21 517 


Amos. 


v.   18-20.. 


517 


MiCAH. 

iii.  8 94 

iv.  1-4 512 

V.  2  sec^ 133 

H.\BAKKUK. 

ii.  14 504 


Zbphaniah. 
i-  14  ;  ii-  3 


S17 


Zechariah. 

vii.  12 93 

ix.  9,  10  ;  xii.  10 512 

xii.  10-13;  xiii.  7...  371 

xiv.  1-9 517 

Malachl 
iii.  2-18  ;  iv.  1-3  .,.  517 

2  Maccabees. 

vii.  9,  II,  14,  23,  29, 

36 


519 


Matthew. 

i-  18-25 138 

i.  21 372 

iii-  17 17s.  427 

iv 138 

iv.  1-18 


139 

v 290 

V.  8 209 

V.  45 268,  274 

V.    17,  17-48 32 

V.  38,   39 140 

vi 290 

vi.  10 302 

vi.  24 464 

vi.  II,  26-30 268 

vi.  33 126,  283 

vii 290 

vii.  II 139 

viii.  3 141 

viii.  20 140 

viii.  22 141 


Chap.  Page 

viii.  24 138 

ix.  2 141 

ix.  6 140,  441 

i.x.  18,  19,  23,  25 520 

ix.  36 138 

X.  15 3^7,  338 

X.  16-20 95 

X.  23 505 

X.  30 274 

-X.  37 14^ 

xi 138 

xi.  4.  5 58 

xi.    10 ...  137 

xi.  22 526 

xi.   22  sc-e/ 317 

xi.   24 338,  526 

xi.  27 34,  141,  215 

xi.  28 412 

xi.  28-30;  xii.  6....  141 

xii.  31,  32 317 

xii.  36 526 

xii.  41  set/ 140 

xiii.  1-23 422 

xiii.  24-30 505 

xiii.  24-33,  31.  32...  512 

xiii.  36-43 505 

xiii.  44 440 

xiii.  44-46 284 

XV.  19 315 

xvi.  21-26 372 

xvi.  27 518,  528 

xvi.  27,  28 505 

xviii.  10 226 

xix.  14 226,354,  416 

XX.  26,  27 500 

XX.  26-28 120 

XX.  28 215,  372 

xxii.  30 523 

xxii.  37-39 303 

xxii.  41-45 140 

xxii.  43 loi 

xxiv 505 

xxiv.  14,  24 516 

xxiv.  30,  31,  36-44  . .  518 

xxiv.  36  ;  xxv 505 

XXV.  34-46..  141,  526,  528 

xxvi.  26-29 373 

xxvi.  29 141 

xxvi.  38 138 

xxvi.  64 518 

xxviii.  2 138 

xxviii.  18 145,  404 

xxviii.  18-20 516 

xxviii.  19 192 

xxviii.  20 167,  404 

Mark. 

i.  15 no,  412 

i-  35;  iii-  S 138 

111-  16 95 


Luke. 


566                 INDEX  TO   SCRIPTURE  PASSAGES 

Chap.                               Page  Chap.                               Page  Chap.                               Page 

iii.  28-30 317  i.  I... 4  34,  137,  143,  .\iv.  6 141 

iv.  28 30  159.307.365  xiv.  9... 34,  142,  751, 

ix.  9 140  i.  18 34,  215  293,  366 

X.  21 138,352  i.  29 374,413  xiv.  13 193 

X.  45 372  111.3 459  xiv.  16,  17,  26 96 

.\ii.  1-12 144  iii.  3-8 458  xiv.  28 142 

.xiii. 32.. 138,  141,  159,  505  iii.  7 459  .\iv.  30 139 

xiv.  61,  64 143  iii.  8 460  xv.  1-8 410 

xvi.  IS 423  iii.  14  jtY 374  xv.  i-io 465 

xvi.  15,  16 516  iii.  16.  .141,  155,  180,  XV.  4-6 474 

216,300,304,413  XV.  13-16 411 

iii.  16,  17 137  XV.  16 426 

iii.  18,19 526  XV.  22-24 3''^7 

i.  33 407  iii.  20,  21 422  XV.  26,  27  ;  xvi.  7-15.  96 

i.  26  sef 138  iii.  34 95  xvi.  8-11 409 

i.  35 139  iv.  6,  9 138  xvi.  II 526 

ii.  9  j^^ 138  iv.  39-42 42  xvi.  12-15 40 

ii.  II 372  V.  17 142,  254  xvi.  12,  13 134 

ii.  40,  52 138  V.  18,  19 142  xvi.  14 409 

iii.  38 291  V.  22 141  xvii.  i 138 

iv.  18 95  v.  22-29 526  xvii.  3  . . . .  176,  267, 

v.  20 141  V.  23 142  285,  465,  486 

vi.  13-16 426  V.  24 458  xvii.  5  134,  196 

vii.  12-15 520  V.  26 141  xvii.  6-19 412 

i.x.  22 140  v.  27 140,141,527  xviii.  36 119 

ix.  31 372  v.  29 525  xviii.  37 134 

X.  35 427  v.  30 141,142  .xi.x.  7 143 

xi.  I 138  V.  36;  vi.  38 134  xix.  II 317 

xi.  2 215  vi.  39.  42 142  xix.  28 138 

xi.  13 139,  215  vi.  48 141  xi.\.  37 422 

xii.  10 317  vi.  51 374,  413  .X.X.  15 138 

xii.  40 518  vii  37 141  XX.  17 141 

xii.  48 317  vii.  37-39 40 

xiii.  3 139    viii.  34 358  Acts. 

xiv.  34 474    viii.  42 134  J    g  g 

XV.  7 118,  180,  218    vin.  46 139  j-  J  J- •  •  •  •  ^gj 

XV.  10 n8    \m.52seg 142  /  jg •+'•  ^^2 

XV.  11-32 217    viii.  56 416,489  jj    J 

xvi.  19-31 489    viii.  58 142  ij-    ^ :(A 

^^i- 23 492  }x- 4. 349  ii:36 :::::::::;::::  145 

-^vi.  26 4951^-25 464  ii.  ^8        .  .409 

-^^■i'-2o,  21 119  X.  7 141  iii.%....:: 139 

>^vii.24 S18    X.11  ..      374.411  iv.  4 102 

''l^-  10 ^SS    X-  IS.   18 374  iv.  2^,28 273 

^■''•"^^'^ 512    X.  28,  29 473  vii.  S5-60 14^ 

^^■37 486    X.30,  33 142  vii.  59,  60 146 

^-^:.38 488    X.  35 102  ^jii/'-'g ^ 

xxii.  43 138    X.  36 134,  139  ^^jj  \^  ' 

xxiii.  34 373    ^^-  S 138  ,^vii   28  ''67 

^^iii-43 489    ^!-  "-44 520  xvii!  29;;;;::::::::   291 

XXUl.   46 138      XL   25 141,520  ^^,jj     ^  j2 

xxiv.47-49 516    X1.50 374  xxiii.  8.  ■.■.■...■.■.■..■.■.■.■  486 

xxiv.  49 409    -xii.  23 363  xxiv   1=;  q'^; 

xn.  24 522  ■    -^ ^^ 

John  -xii.  24-33 375  o^,...,c 

J  .xii.  27 138  ROM.\NS. 

i.  1-18 136    xii.  31 526  i 303 

i.  1,  2 172    xii.  32 216  1.4 143 

i-  4 178,280,365    xii.  47 155  i.  7 146 

i- 9 410,419    xiii.  21 138,363  i.  17 444 


INDEX  TO   SCRIPTURE   PASSAGES 


567 


Chap.  Page 

i.  l8 317  seq. 

i.   20 262 

i.  25 262,  458 

ii 303 

ii.i-i6 527 

ii.  6,  7 443 

iii.  2 81 

iii.  20 443 

lii.  23 322,  443 

iii.  24-26 375,  444 

iii.  26 367 

iv 41S 

V.  7 304 

V.  8 217,359,  37^ 

V.  10,  II 376 

V.  12 321,  392 

V.  12-21 140,  299, 

328  seq.  377,  527 

V.  18 346,  412 

V.  20 325 

V.   20,   21 244 

vi.  1 469 

vi.  I,  2 446 

vi.  12 327 

vi.  15 445 

vii.  14 358 

vii.  24,  25 346 

viii.  1 465 

viii.  3 135.  139.  146 

viii.  3,  4     377<  a¥> 

viii.  6 466 

viii.  II 521 

viii.  16 40 

viii.  19-23 524  seq. 

viii.  20 20 

viii.  21 21,  286,  405 

viii.  22 405 

viii.  28 117,  279, 

350.  405,  428 

viii.  28-30 428 

viii.  29 294 

viii.  31 279 

viii.  32 135,  412 

viii.  33 412,  429 

viii.  34 429 

viii.  38 .279,  429 

ix 427 

ix.  S 146 

i.x.  II,  12 425 

X 427 

X.  13 137 

xi 427 

xi.  25,  26,  29 517 

xi.  33 153 

xi.  36 193 

xii 96,  473 

xiii.  I 88,   185 

XV.  4 102 

xvi.  20,  24 146 

xvi.  26 102 


I  Corinthians. 

Chap.  Page 

i.  2,  3 146 

i-   7 518 

i.  20,  24 170 

i-  30 456 

li-  4.  5 40 

ii.  II 201 

ii.  13 97,  loi 

ii.  14 41 

ii.  16 137 

iv.  5 146 

vi.  19 466,  521 

i.x.  9,  10 102 

ix.  27 474 

X.  4.  5 137 

x.  22 loi,  137 

xi.  7 292 

xii 96,  467.  473 

xii.  4-6 193 

xii.  4-13 410 

xii.  12 77,  465 

xii.  21 78 

xiii 96 

xiii.  9,  10,  II 31 

xiii.  12 31,  494 

xiii.  13 456 

xiv 96 

XV 520 

XV.  22. .   140,  299,  328,  525 
XV.  24-28... 280,  407,  seq. 

XV.  26 521 

XV.  38-58 522 

XV.  42 521 

XV.  45  seq 140 

XV.  49 294 

XV.    54 S2I 

XV.  46 487 

xvi.  23 146 

2  Cop  nthians. 

i.  2 146 

iv.  4 293 

V.  i-io 492,  506 

V.  3.  4 490 

V.  5 466,  521 

V.  8 489,  490 

V.   10 146,  528 

V.  14-21 377 

V.   17 458 

V.  19 iSS 

V.  21 139 

viii.  9 137 

xii.  3 491 

xii.  4 491,  492 

xiii.  14 146,   193 

Galatians. 

i.  3 146 

i.  15,  16 426 


Chap.  Page 

ii.   20 465,  466 

iii.  6  seq 415 

iii.  10,  II 443 

iv.  4 13s.  146 

iv.  4,  5 182 

iv.  19 465 

V.  6 467 

V.  22 410,  475 

vi.  7,  8 528 

vi.   16 427 

vi.  18 146 

Ephesians. 

i  .2 146 

i.  3-14 428 

i.  4 156,  362 

i.  7 155 

i.  10 154,  177 

i.  22,  23 405,  406 

ii.  10 273 

ii.  20 102 

ii.  20-22 465 

iii.  7 168 

iii.  II 427 

iii.  16 410 

iii.   17 17s.  410,  465 

iv.  4-6 193 

iv.  8 96 

iv.  13 306 

iv.  24 293 

V.  25,  27 412 

V.  31,  32 46s 

vi.  23,  24 146 

Philippians. 

i.  6 473,  506 

i.  23 489 

ii.  5 366 

ii.  6  seq 135,  137,  159 

ii.  7 144,  160 

ii.  9,   10 146 

ii.  10,  II. .  .116,  147, 

177.  530 

ii.  12 439 

ii.  12,  13 270,  467 

iii.  10,  II 526 

iii.    12-14 470 

iii.  20 492 

iii.  21 183,  521,  523 

iv.  5 506 

COLOSSIANS. 

•  13-17 "^SS 

■    IS 293 

.  16 231 

.  16-18 170 

.  17 178,  280 

.  20 177 

i.  3 280 


568 


INDEX  TO   SCRIPTURE  PASSAGES 


Chap.  Page 

iii-   3 174 

iii.  10 293 

1  Thessalonians. 

ii.  13 102 

iv.  IS 5^6 

V.  2  se// 518 

2  Thessalonians. 

i.  6-10 146 

ii-  3  ■'^'V 516 

ii.  13-15 102 

1  Timothy. 

ii.  4 216 

ii-  4-6 413 

11-5 147 

iv.  I 516 

iv.  10 413 

vi.  14 518 

2  Timothy. 

i.  10 486 

iii-  15 75.  83 

iii.   16 102 

iv,  I,  8,   22 146 

Titus. 

ii.  II   413 

ii.   13 146,  518 

Hebrews. 

i.  2 136 

i-  3 136,  280,  293 

i.  6 146 

i.  8-12 137 

i,  14..   118,  177,  231,  494 

ii.  9 216,  393,  413 

ii.  10 144,  184 

ii.  16  177 

ii.  17...  138,  140,  144,  378 

ii.  18 138-140 

iii.   7 102 

iv.  9 494 

iv.   14 140 

iv.  15..  139,  140,  144.  147 

V.  i-io 378 

V.  7-10 140 

V.  8 378 

vi.  4-6 317.  474 

vii.  26,  27 378 

ix.  8 102 

ix.  15.  26 415 

X.  4-10,  12,  13 378 

X.  25 506 

X.  26 474 


Chap.  Page 

X.  26,  27 317 

xi.    I =  450 

-xi-  3 257 

XI.  13 415 

xii.  1 118,  494 

xii-  23 494 

xii.  24 490 

xiii.  8 147 

James. 

i.  18  460 

ii-  9 449 

ii.  14,  17 469 

iii.  2 322,  470 

iii.  9 292 

V.  8 146,  506 

V.  10,  II 146 

1  Peter. 

i.  2 428 

i-  5 506 

i-  7.  8 518 

i-  II 136,  365 

i-  18 379 

i-  19 139.  379 

i.  20 427 

i.  23 460 

ii.  20,  21 474 

ii.  21 366 

ii.  22 139 

ii-  24 379 

111.  18 139,  379 

iii.  iS-20 1^6  sei^.,  418 

iii.  18-22 496 

iv.  6  418,  496 

iv.  7. . .    506 

2  Peter. 

i.  4 174 

i.  21 102 

ii-4 177 

ii-  S 496 

ii.  20  sei^ 317 

iii-  4 518 

iii-  8 519 

iii.  10 518 

iii.  15 102 

iii.  16 102,  438 

I  John. 

-  2 143 

•  3.  4 102 

.  5 210 

■  7  ■■•■■ 379 

-  8 322,  471 

1-  2 379,  413 


Chap.  Page 

ii.  18 506,  516 

ii.  22 516 

ii:  29 139 

iii.  2 169,  294 

iii.  7 139 

iii-  14  458 

iii-  16 379 

iv.  2 148 

iv.  3 148,  516 

iv.  8 200,  209 

iv.  10   217,  379 

iv.  II 218 

iv.  16 120,  200 

iv,  19 218,  448 

v.  6-10 40 

V.  16 317 

V.  20 147 

2  John. 
7 148,  516 


JUDE. 


Revelation. 


146, 


-  I.  3 

•  5 

.6 

-  7 .----- 

.  18.  ..130,  146,   147, 

-  19 

1-  7 

V.  4  si-g 

V.   6 147, 

V.  II.  12 

vi.   9 489, 

vi.  10 

vii.  9  sei^ 

xi.  IS 

xiv 

xiv.  1-5 

xiv.   13 


XV.  2-4 

xvi 

xvi.  7  ;  xix.  i  scf.. . . 

xix,  16 

XX.  i-io 512, 

XX.   7-10 

XX.    12,    13 

xxi.  4 

xxii.  6,  7,  12 

xxii.    13 

xxii.  17 

xxii.    20 


177 
473 


506 
146 

379 
506 

493 

lOI 

492 
489 
379 
146 
490 
490 
489 
423 
516 
489 
494 
S16 
489 
S16 
489 
405 
51S 
S16 
528 

347 
506 
146 
412 
506 


